CONTENTdm
British Columbia Historical Books Collection
Behring Sea Seal Fisheries
Great Britain. Foreign Office
"([Great Britain. Parliament. Command papers] C. 6131) At head of title: United States, no. 2 (1890)" -- Lowther, B. J., & Laing, M. (1968). A bibliography of British Columbia: Laying the foundations, 1849-1899. Victoria, BC: University of Victoria, p. 98. "Presented to both Houses of Parliament by command of Her Majesty, August 1890." -- Title page.
xiii, 532 pages : tables ; 34 cm
application/pdf
UNITED STATES. No. 2 (1890). CORRESPONDENCE RESPECTING THE BEHRING SEA SEAL FISHERIES: 1886-90. Presented to both Houses of Parliament by Command of Her Majesty. August 1890. LONDON: PRINTED FOR HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE BY HARRISON AND SONS, ST. MARTIN'S LANE, PRINTERS IN ORDINARY TO HER MAJESTY. And to be purchased, either directly or through any Bookseller, from EYRE and SPOTTISWOODE, East Harding Street, Fleet Street, E.C., and 32, Abingdon Street, Westminster, S.W.; or ADAM and CHARLES BLACK, 6, North Bridge, Edinburgh; or HODGES, FIGGIS, & Co. 104, Grapton Street, Dublin TABLE OF CONTENTS. No. 1 2 3 Name. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Colonial Office . To Sir L. West .. Colonial Office .. Sir L. West »» „ • • Admiralty .. Colonial Office .. To Sir L. West .. Sir L. West . To Sir L. West Sir L, West Admiralty .. Messrs. Lampson and Co. Colonial Office To Sir L. West Sir L. West To Messrs. Lampson and Co. Sir L. West Date. Subject. To Sir L. West (Telegraphic) Sir L. West Colonial Office Sept. | 1886 9, 25, 21, 21, Oct. 7, 16, 20, 21, 23 To Sir L. West 24 Sir L. West 25 » » 26 To Sir L. West 27 Sir I,. West 28 | Colonial Offic 29 I To Colonial Offic SO Sir L. West 31 Colonial Office 32 I Sir L. W«« 33 I Colonial Office 84 I To Sir L. West 21, 30, 21, Nov. 4, 12, 16, 18, 19, 19, H, Dec. 6, 10, Jan. 4, 1887 8, 10, m 27, Feb. 4, 14, Jan. 30, Feb. 28, Mar. IS, Apr. 2, 2, Three British Columbian sealers seized by United States' revenue-cruizer " Corwin " Copy of above. To ask United States' Government for information .. ... .. •• Refers to No. 1. Details of captures of "Thornton," | Onward," and " Carolina." Protest should be made and compensation demanded History of the origin of the Alaska Commercial Company .. • • • • • • Newspaper extracts relating to seizures Sends copy of United States' Act to prevent extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska, and of the Alaska Company's lease Refers to No. 3. Sends further details, with Report of Committee of Canadian Privy Council. Has any action been taken ? .. .. To protest against seizures and reserve rights Has any reply been received to No. 21 Or any appeal lodged against decisions of United States' Courts ?. - .. .. . - . • Replies to above. No information Recapitulates facts of seizures as reported to Her Majesty's Government. To see Mr. Bayard, who will, no doubt, make due reparation Copies of notes founded on Nos. 2 and 8 Extract from " Daily British Colonist " of Victoria relating to the seizures .. .. . ■ Facts relating to seal fishery. Hope Her Majesty's Government will support United States' Government in preserving seals Telegram from Canada asking if any answer has been received from United States. Case one of great hardship .. .. Substance of above. To report Answers above. Mr. Bayard has not yet received official report of proceedings of Court Acknowledges No. 14. Question being considered Refers to No. 10. Mr. Bayard's apologies for delay .. To seek assurances that no seizures will be made beyond Alaska territorial waters pending settlement .. .. .. .. .. Copy of note founded on above .. .. Copy of despatch from Canada, with Report of Privy Council explaining views of Dominion Government on historical rights, with letters from persons interested, and newspaper extracts Copy of preceding. To express concern at absence of information, and urge immediate attention Note to Mr. Bayard founded on above Note from Mr. Bayard explaining delay and assuring of observance of international obligations .. To ask for information from time to time President has issued orders for discontinuance of pending proceedings, and release of vessels and persons .. .. .. Despatch from Governor-General, with Report of Privy Council, and full statements of claims for compensation Acknowledges above. Proposed to defer sending in claims pending further examination Report of Governor of Alaska for 1886 Answers No. 29. Concurs in delay Copy of letter from a San Francisco firm to President protesting against exclusive claims of Alaska Company Can Canadian vessels count on not being molested during ensuing season ? To make above inquiry ., .. .. Page I 1 9 11 12 15 20 20 20 20 22 23 24 25 26 26 26 27 27 27 28 37 37 38 39 3S 40 44 45 49 49 52 53 TABLE OF CONTENTS; 111 No. 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 Name. Sir L. West Date. Colonial Office To Colonial Office.. To Sir L. West Sir L. West (Telegraphic) Mar. 29, 1887 Apr. 2, 13, May 6, 30, To Sir L. West Sir L. West To Sir L. West Sir L. West Admiralty Sir L. West ,, » Admiralty To Sir L. West .. Sir H. Holland to Marquis of Lansdowne Sir L. West. To Sir L. West .. Colonial Office .. To Sir L. West Memorandum communicated by Baron Plessen Sir L. West Admiralty .. .. Sir L. West Memorandum communicated by M. d'Adelborg To M-d'Adelborar June 27, July 8, 9, 12, Aug. 2, 4, 10, 10, 15, 24, 20, 22, Sept. 5, 10, 14, 6, 15, 15, 24, 27, 27, Oct. 5, Sept. 23, Oct. 4, Sept. 28, Oct. 10, 11. Subject. Page [128] Attempts of Alaska Company to obtain further protection .. .. .. .. The Captain of the " Corwin " has been cited to defend himself for seizures effected on American schooner" Sierra" .. .. Mr. Blgine's replies to questions founded on No. 34. Indefinite. Incloses " Provisions relating to the Unorganized Territory of Alaska " Refers to No. 36. Case postponed ., .. Extract from " New York Times," showing United States' reply to pretensions of Russia previous to cession of Alaska .. .. .. .. Report of Canadian Privy Council urging speedy reparation,.with a resume of facts by Minister of Marine and Fisheries .. .. .. Acknowledges above. We should wait for Report of judicial proceedings. Want copies of papers laid before Canadian Parliament .. Copy of No. 40. To get judicial records-.. Forwards copies of judicial proceedings in Alaska District Court in cases of the three vessels seized Acknowledges above. Were they communicated without comment ? . .. .. .. Answers above. Yes ., .. .. News received of further seizures. To remind Mr. Bayard of assurances given in No. 27, and to communicate information . .. .. Asks for further information and details connected with judicial proceedings sent home in No. 43 .. Mr. Bayard's replies to No. 46. He knows of no assurances, but will ask grounds for seizures Seizure of " Anna Beck " .. .. Position of " Sayward," " Dolphin," and " Grace U when seized, with remarks on habits of seals Copies of Reports by Captain of the li Rush," who effected above captures, giving details Reports by Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culme-Seymour on seizures of " Anna Beck " and " W. P. Say- ward," with copies of statements, declarations,! and indictments General review of the position. No doubt United States' Government will admit their liability, and give compensation.. .. .. Sends copy of No. 53. Explains position " New York Times" on maritime jurisdiction in Behring's Sea .. .. .. .. Have any steps been taken to appeal in cases of " Onward," " Carolina," and " Thornton''? Copies of two despatches from Canada respecting seizure of ''Grace," "Dolphin," and " W. P. Sayward " Telegram from Canada reporting that vessels are still detained, and asking for inquiry ... Copy of above. To inquire why vessels have not been released as promised (see No. 27) .. Copies of inclosurcs in No. 57. To make representations to United States' Government respecting seizure of these three vessels German Government ask views of Her Majesty's Government as to proposal of United States for International Convention for preservation of seals Acknowledges receipt of No. 53. Copy left with Mr. Bayard .. .. .. .. Copy of letter from Commander-in-chief on Pacific Station, with list of sealing schooners Answers No. 59. Note to Mr. Bayard respecting non-release of vessels, and extract from " New York Herald " on the subject Invitation from United States to Sweden to join negotiations for preservation .. Answers above. No similar invitation received from United States' Government. Will Sweden accept ? ,. .. .. .. a 2 53 53 54 58 58 61 64 64 64 76 76 76 77 77 79 79 80 82 88 90 91 92 92 95 95 96 96 96 96 98 98 99 IV TABLE OE CONTENTS. No. 67 68 69 70 71 To Sir L. West 72 To Colonial Off 73 Sir L. West 74 ,» », 75 » »> 76 „ ,, 77 » 5> 78 To Sir L. West 79 80 Sir L. West 81 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 Name. To Baron Plessen, Admiralty Sir L. West Colonial Office Colonial Office To Plenipotentiaries at Fisheries Conference To Colonial Office.. Mr. J. Chamberlain, M.R Colonial Office Sir L. West .. Colonial Office 93 Mr. Phelps 94 Sir L. West 95 To Sir L. West Date. Oct. 11, 1887 13, 14, 17, 19, 20, 12, 12, 12, 14, 14, 26, 29, 20, 23, Nov. 19, 28, 29, 29, 28, 17, 10, 22, Subject. Dec. 26, Jan. 5, 14, 23, 1888 Feb. 8, 13, Answers No. 61. No similar proposal made to Her Majesty's Government. What will be decision of German Government ? Sends copy of letter from Commander-in-chief on Pacific Station, with newspaper extracts as to demurrer handed in on behalf of British sealers . Renewed orders sent for release of vessels , Copy of despatch from Canada respecting seizure of "Alfred Adams." Suggests that protest against right of seizure should be made to United States' Government .. Refers to above. To protest against seizure of " Alfred Adams " and similar proceedings Answers No. 70. Sir L. West instructed to protest against seizure of " Alfred Adams." Protests made in previous cases .. .. .. Refers to Nos. 59 and 64. Reply received from Mr. Bayard Answers No. 56. Notices of appeal lying in Sitka Court. No further stops taken Answers No. 60. Note to Mr. Bayard -respecting seizure of " Grace," " Dolphin," and " W. P. Sayward" .. .. .. .. Refers to above. Reply from Mr. Bayard acknowledging note respecting seizures of three vessels.. Brief of United States' Government filed in Sitka Court, and article thereon from " New York Herald" Refers to No. 71. To give Mr. Bayard copy of inclosure iu No. 70 Refers to No. 69. Approves action Answers No. 71. Copy of note to Mr. Bayard protesting against seizure of " Alfred Adams " and similar proceedings Refers to above. Copy of note from Mr. Bayard acknowledging " Alfred Adams " protest Despatch from Canada inclosing Minute of Executive Council of British Columbia respecting value, of sealing industry to province No invitation received from United States' Government as to negotiations for preservation of seals. Her Majesty's Government favourably disposed to- negotiate separately from question of fishery rights .. .. .. .. .. Sends copies of Nos. 82 and 85 Answers No. 82. Quotes instructions to Plenipotentiaries at Fishery Conference as to including Behring Sea question Explains circumstances under which negotiations for. preservation of seals were mentioned. Subject not referred to at Conference Revised claims of owners of " Thornton " and' " Carolina" .. .. . ., Refers to Nos. 36 and 38. Case of " Sierra " will probably be dismissed .. .. .. Refers to No. 87. Revised claim of owner of "Onward" Statements of claims of owners and agents of " Favourite," " W. P. Sayward," " Grace," " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," | Alfred Adams," and "Ada".. Despatch from Canada saying notice has been given of orders for release of " Onward," " Thornton," and | Carolina " .. Revised statement of claims of " Thornton," " Onward," and I Carolina," and statement of personal claims of masters and mates of "Dolphin," " W. P. Savward," " Anna Beck," " Grace," and "Ada" .. Submits Mr. Bayard's detailed proposal for International Regulations " New York Herald " on the question of the seizures and closed seas .. Copy of No. 93 .' Pact: 99 99 102 103 110 110 110 111 111 112 112 121 121 121 122 122 124 125 125 125 126 136 136 141 164 165 172 180 181 TABLE OF CONTENTS. Name. To Sir L. Weatl To Colonial Office To M. de Staa 99 | M. de Staal 100 I Colonial Office 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 To Colonial Office To Sir L. West . Colonial Office . To Colonial Office. Colonial Office Count Piper Colonial Office . To Sir I.. West . To Colonial Office.. Sir L. West To Sir L. West . Sir L. West (Telegraphic) To Colonial Office Colonial Office To Colonial Office ,. , Sir L. West Date. Feb. 22, 1888 Mar. 3, 3, 7, 12, 17, 17, 22, 24, 24, 24, 28, 30, Apr. 30, 19, 3, To Sir R. Morier (also to Sir L. West). To Sir L. West .. To Colonial Office, Board of Trade, and Admiralty Colonial Office Sir L. West 126 Colonial Office 127 Admiralty 128 Colonial Office 129 », ,, 130 To Sir L. West 131 Sir L. West 132 Board of Trade 133 Sir L. West 134 5, 10, 14, Mar. 27, 31, Apr. 5, 6, 16, 17, 20, 20, 11, 24, 25, 25, 27, 2P, 19, May 4, Apr. 22, May 1, ; Subject. 102. International Regulations (see No. 93). Interview with Mr. Phelps. Readiness to join United | States and Russia) in an Agreement ' Copies of above andl No. 93, for observations Would be glad if he! would join in discussion Answers above. Vlfill ask for instructions Answers No. 97. Must consult Canada , Answers above. Copies of Nos. 98, 99, and Have reserved alt rights and claims Copies of Nos. 98 and 99. Her Majesty's Govern- J ment do not admit rights of jurisdiction '• " /."'j Submits notice of a question by Mr. Gourlev, M.P.,! for opinion as to answer on points raised Answers above Telegram from Governor-General of Canada, who is anxious for assurances Canadian vessels will not be interfered with in coming season Swedish Government hopes the negotiations will be successful, but is not sufficiently interested to take part .. Refers to Nos. 104 and 105. Possibility of armed' resistance by sealers. Anxious for assurances of non-interference. As to sending a man-of-war; to watch proceedings Copy of above. Tb represent extreme importance, of Her Majesty's Government being able to contradict report of intended seizures by United [ States Answers No. 107. Gives substance of above . I On right of seized vessels to bond pending appeal . Interview with Mr. Phelps. Mr. Bayard's unofficial assurances that vessels will not be molested pending negotiations, though the latter would be rendered abortive by coming Presidential election See No. 108. No orders issued yet for capture of ; British vessels .. .. .. ., Substance of above On question of bonding captured sealers (see No. 110) .. Answers No. 114. Views on bonding -and appeal questions Sends a letter by Mr. Swan, Assistant Collector of Port Townsend, on fur-seals, bearing on question of jurisdiction .. .. .. ., Copy of communication founded on No. 102 Refers to No. 110. Memorandum by Mr. Benjamin j Councillor-at-Law. Bonding question settled .. Refers to No. 108. Execution of instructions; Mr. Bayard hopes there will be no more seizures, Interview with Russian Ambassador and United! States' Charge d'Affaires. Decision as to a provisional basis for negotiation Propose Mixed Commission to investigate claims and decide as to compensation Copy of No. 1 21, for observations Answers No. 116. Telegram from Canada as to last year's captures .. .. ., Refers to. No. 120. Private note from Mr. Bayardj repeating that no orders for seizures have been issued .. .. Telegrams between Canada and British Columbia; As to self-defence by sealers .. Answers No. 123. Fully concur Ditto. Canada will probably make reserves. Copies of correspondence See above. Canadian criticisms See No. 114. Propose to extend time for appeal .. See No. 122. Copy of note to Mr. Bayard Answers No. 123. Disposed to agree .. Refers to No. 131. Mr. Bayard prefers to await ' judgment of Appellate Court Answers No. 130. Copy of note to Mr. Bayard .. Page 181 182 182 1S2 183 183 1S4 184 185 185 186 187 187 188 188 188 189 189 190 191 191 194 194 195 196 197 197 197 198 198 199 199 201 201 202 202 203 203 VI TABLE OF CONTENTS. No. 135 136 137 138 Name. Colonial Office Sir L. West M. de Staal Colonial Office 1391 Mr. Phelps 140 Colonial Office 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 To Sir L. West . To Mr. Phelps . To Colonial Office. Colonial Office Date. May 12, 1888 30, July 25, 25, 28, Aug. 1, 2, 2, 2, 3, 10, 10, 18. Sir L. West To Sir L. West . To Colonial Office. To Sir L. West . To Colonial Office.. Sir L. West To Colonial Office.. .. Colonial Office .. .. To Lord Sackville (Telegraphic) To Colonial Office.. .. Sir L. West To Colonial Office .. Colonial Office .. .. To Colonial Office Colonial Office To Mr. Herbert .. ., (Telegraphic) Colonial Office To Mr. Herbert (Telegraphic) Mr. Herbert (Telegraphic) To Colonial Office .. Mr. Herbert 18, 16, Sept. 1, 1, 3, 3, 13, 15, Oct 2, 8, 10, 10, Sept. 30, Oct. 13, 20, 25, Nov. 1, 17, 21, 22, 26, Dec. 3, 5, 5, Subject. Nov. 30, Dec. 12, Jan. 8, 1889 Canadian objections to close time Regulations maintained .. Refers to No. 134. Mr. Bayard's views as to extension of time for appeal .. .. . • Extract from a Russian Memorandum regarding the hunting of seals -.. • > • • Circumstances under which " W. P. Sayward " was released under bond at Sitka . • • • Urges immediate action in regard to International Convention .. .. . - • • Sends a telegram respecting the proposed sale by the United States of the " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," " Grace," and " Ada." Urge its postponement .. • • Substance of above, for required action .. Acknowledges No. 139 .. •• •■ Copy of No. 139, for early consideration .. Substance, of No. 141 Answers No. 143. Canadian Report on its way .. Refers to No. 144. Canada informed .. . • Minute of Canadian Privy Council, giving their views on the United States' proposals for a close time. They protest against United States' doctrine .. .. .. .. .. Refers to No. 146. Minutes by Canadian Privy Council on proposed sales. What is progress of " W. P. Sayward " case ? .. .. •. Answers No. 141. Note to Unitod States' Government .. .. .. .. .. Refers to above. Sale will be postponed Ditto. Copy of No. 148, for report .. Ditto Substance of preceding .. .. Refers to No. 121. Conversation with Mr. Phelps on close season question. Difficulties felt by Canada .. .. .. .. .. Refers to No. 147. Close time. Substance of above .. .. .. .. .. Refers to No. 150. Copies of correspondence. Should sale be proceeded with ? .. .. Answers No. 151. Case of "Sayward" not yet docketed in Supreme Court .. .. .. Copy of No. 155. What action ? .. .. Answers above. Proposed reply .. To act in sense of above .. .. ., Substance of above .. .. .. ... Refers to No. 155. As to disposal of condemned sealers .. ,. .. Refers to No. 160. Copy of No. 161. What should be done with '* Ada " ? .. .. "W. P. Sayward." See No. 156. Should not action advised by Canada now be taken ? See No. 158. Despatch from Canada on bonding of | Grace," " Dolphin," and " Anna Beck " .. Refers to above and No. 162. As to case of "Ada" Should substance of above be communicated ? Answers above. Yes See No. 159. Substance of No. 165 .. .] " Ada." Correspondence from Canada as to original appraisement See No. 164. What has been done about appraisement ? ., What answer to No. 159 ? Answers above. None. Has asked Substance of above Refers to No. 168. Steps taken Refers to No. 171. Mr. Bayard on the question of the sale Mr. Hoar's motion in Senate for papers and Regulations governing fisheries Page 204 204 205 208 209 209 210 210 210 211 211 211 212 216 219 219 220 220 220 221 221 223 223 223 224 224 224 225 225 226 228 228 228 228 229 229 230 230 230 230 231 233 TABLE OP CONTENTS. VU No. Name. Date. Subject. Page 177 To Mr. Edwardes .. <. Mar. 23, 1889 President Harrison's Proclamation against foreign sealers entering Behring Sea. To telegraph terms of.. .. .. .. 234 178 Mr. Edwardes 23, Substance of Proclamation .. .. .. 234 179 ,, » • • •» 23, Text of Proclamation .. .. .. 234 180 Colonial Office .. .. 26, Calls attention to Proclamation. To make representation.. 235 181 To Colonial Office 30, Answers above. Will delay action pending receipt of Act for protection of salmon in Alaska 236 182 Mr. Edwardes .. .. 15, On proposed sale of ships. Canadian Government think any interference useless (see No. 175) .. 236 183 ,» ,, .. *. .18, Copy of Act for protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska 237 184 To Colonial Office .. Apr. 4, Copy of No. 182, for observations 238 185 Mr. Edwardes .. .. Mar. 25, See No. 176. Sends extracts from the published correspondence dealing with the historical question 238 186 ,, ,, . • • • 23, President's Proclamation. Remarks on bearing of .. 242 187 ,, ,5 •• •• 25, Salmon Fisheries Act (see No. 183). Report on its course through the two Houses in Congress .. 243 188 Colonial Office .. .. Apr. 10, President's Proclamation. Remarks on term " dominion of the United States in the waters of the Behring Sea " 251 189 „ „ . * .. 10, Acknowledges No. 184. No remarks. What is position of " W. P. Sayward " appeal ? 251 190 To Colonial Office.. 11, Copies of Nos. 179, 186, and 187. Remarks on the meaning of the Act and Proclamation .. 251 191 To Sir J. Pauncefote 13, " W. P. Sayward." What is position of case? 252 192 Mr. Edwardes .. .. 2, Remarks on rejected Bill of Mr. Dunn for amending section 1963 of the Revised Statutes 252 193 To Colonial Office.. .. 18, Answers No. .188, Are awaiting Reports from Sir J. Pauncefote 253 194 » „ . • .. 18, How long before 1886 were Canadian vessels in habit of sealing in Behring Sea ? .. .. 254 195 Colonial Office .. .. 20, Answers No. 190. Would be glad if our meaning could be officially recorded .. .. 254 196 ,, ,, . * • • 29, Answers No. 194. Has asked Canada .. .. 255 197 Sir J. Pauncefote .. 26, " W. P. Sayward." Answers No. 191 .. 255 198 Colonial Office .. .. May 14, Extract from Annual Report of Canadian Department of Fisheries for 1888 255 199 Sir J. Pauncefote .. .. 24, • United States' revenue-cruizers " Rush" and " Bear" ordered to Behring Sea .. .. .. 257 200 Consul-General Booker ., June 28, Professor Rayner's letter on the whole question .. 258 201 Colonial Office .. .. July 27, Minute of Canadian Privy Council, with full Report by Minister of Marine and Fisheries, in which case is argued and claims presented 2S2 202 ,» », * * •• Aug. 3, Alleged seizure of S Black Diamond " in Behring Sea .. .. ., .. 273 203 To Colonial Office . .. 5, Answers above. Should have official details also as to " Triumph ".. .. .. 274 204 Colonial Office .. .. 8, Telegram from Canada. Reports appear correct .. 274 205 ,, ,. • • 9, Refers to No. 194. Full Report by Minister of Marine and Fisheries .. ,. .. 275 206 ,, ,» • • *. 9, " Black Diamond" and " Triumph." Further Report .. .. 289 207 >, », ■ • • • 14, ' Case of the American sealer " San Diego '' as hearing on above cases 290 208 To Colonial Office.. 17, Appeals for seizures in 1886 should be pushed on .. 294 209 Mr. Edwardes .. .. 5, On cases of " Black Diamond " and " Triumph," and arguments of United States in regard to seals .. .. .. .. .. 294 210 Colonial Office •.. .. 19, Refers to No. 208. Telegram to Canada 295 211 >, » • • ■ ■ 20, " Black Diamond" and " Triumph." Reports from Canadian Government 295 212 To Mr. Edwardes .. ., 22, Alleged seizures. What truth in reports ? To request issue of instructions to prevent recurrence .. 300 213 ,> ,, • * - • 22, Refers to above. To remind Mr. Blaine of Mr. Bayard's unofficial assurances. Sir J. Pauncefote will discuss whole question, but Her Majesty's Government protest against seizures ., 3C0 ryin TABLE OE CONTENTS; No. 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 •233 234 235 236 237 238 a39 240 241 Name. Mr. Edwardes Colonial Office . ,» ,, To Colonial Office Colonial Office , Admiralty . To Mr. Edwardes . To Colonial Office. Colonial Office . Date. Mr. Edwardes To Mr. Edwardes , Colonial Office To Colonial Office. Mr. Edwardes . To Mr. Edwardes To Colonial Office. Colonial Office . Mr. Edwardes To Colonial Office.. 242 To Sir J. Pauncefote 243 Sir C. Lampson and Co. 244 Colonial Office 245 Sir J. Pauncefote 246 >• 247 To Sir C. Lampson and Co. 24 S Sir C. Lampson and Co. Aug. 26, 1889 29, Sept. 2, 3, 4, 9, 9, 10, 10, 13, 13, 17, 19, Oct. 2, 3, 5, o, 12, 14, 15, 24, 24, 24, 9, 15, Nov. 2, 5, 6> Oct. 31, Nov. l, 13, 14, Subject. -Summary ,of interview, and copies of correspondence with Mr. Blaine on above instructions . | Black Diamond " and " Triumph." Further from Canada. What answer ? .. Copy of telegram to Canada summarizing information in No. 214 Answers No. 21a. Say question is being considered. We have, so far, no authentic details .. Refers to No. 215. Further details from Canada.. I JBlack Diamond " and " Triumph." Statements :by owners Approves No. 214 To ask Canada to telegraph at once any further • stoppages Affidavits of masters of '' Black Diamond" and " Triumph " Instructions sent in sense of No. 221 Recent seizures. Telegram from Canada. Affi-, davits being forwarded .. .. ., Refers to No. 217. Copy of telegram sent to Canada Copy of private letter to Mr. Blaine asking for answer to request for assurances of non-interference .. ,. .. ,. .. Refers to above. Mr. Blaine's answer Copy of No. 222. To protest against seizures as wholly unjustified by international law. Refers to Mr. Bayard's unofficial assurances Refers to " close time " negotiations of 1886 and 1887. Are ready to discuss an agreement for the purpose Approves No. 226 Letter from Mr. Clarke inclosing Report of a meeting at Victoria to protest against seizures. Case of " Juanita " Refers to No. 222. Copies of Nos. 228 and 229 .. Interview with Mr. Blaine on the subject of Mr. Bayard's unofficial assurances regarding seizures' Answers above. Explains what assurances were referred to in No. 228 Acknowledges No. 231. Suggests replying to effect that whole question is under discussion Forwards from Canadian Government duplicate of Report in No. 231 Seizures of "Minnie," "Juanita," «Pathfinder,""' and "Lily." Reports from Canadian.Government, with copies of affidavits of masters See No. 210. Report by Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries on question of appeals against 1886 seizures Question of appeals. Sends Memorandum by Mr. Calderon Carlisle on the case of the Unifed States' vessel " Sylvia Handy," which illustrates point Refers to No. 234, and sends copy of letter to Mr. Blaine in regard to it .. Acknowledges Nos. 236, 237, and 238. Propose to await Sir J. Pauncefote's Reports .. Approves letter in No. 240 Urges importance of settling the question, in interests of seal preservation, before it is too late The High Commissioner for Canada in London is' to discuss question with Her Majesty's Government Copies of letters in newspapers by Mr. Felton and" Mr. R. Rayner arguing the question from different points Preliminary conversation with Mr. Blaine. He" does^not assert mare clausum doctrine, and concurs in resuming the tripartite negotiation regarding a | close season " Acknowledges No. 243. Will be glad of any statistics and information Answers above. Collecting information". Their letters may be published ,. Page 300 303 304 305 305 307 308 309 309 312 312 313 313 314 315 315 316 316 322 322 322 323 323 324 330 336 337 338 338 338 339 340 350 352 352 TABLE OF CONTENTS. UC No. I Nam< SCBJCCT. PaRC 249 Colonial Office .. . No*. 30, 1869 International Arbitration and 11 Peace Association 251 i To Sir J. Pauncefote .. | 252 I Sir J. Pauncefote .. 253 554 Colonial Office To International Arbitration and Peace Association 305 ( Colonial Office .. .. 256 357 258 " i» " it 359 To Colonial Office.. 26U To Sir J. Pauncefote 261 262 To Colonial Office.. 263 364 365 366 Sir J. Pauncefote .. (Telegraphic) To Sir J. Pauncefote .. Sir J. Pauncefote .. (Telegraphic) 267 1* « • < 368 n » •• 369 Colonial Office «, 370 •» )» • • 371 Sir J. Pauncefote . • 373 n n • • 378 I To Sir J. Paoncefote 374 Sir J. Pauncefote .. 375 376 Colonial Office .. To Sir J. Pauncefote Feb. 377 it i 378 To Colonial Office.. 379 Colonial Office .. 380 Sir J. Pauncefote .. 2S1 i« ,' •• 383 To Colonial Office.. [128] 7, 13, 10, 11, 13, 18, !•», 16, 16, 17, 17, 17. 18, 18, 18, 26, 36. 26, 10, 18, 9, 33, 28, 30, 31, 1, It «, 6, 7, 8, 10, osnsahiee of Prhy | phut Mm that a lily, and inclosing Refer* to No. '.OS Report i Council of Canada atgnii do** season is of pressing I statement* of practical haulers, wi:h history of fanadiau sealing imprests .. • •[ 3&" Hope a spwdy »etllcnu-nt will bo arrived at .. j 'M Scnd« certain proposals as base* of possible negolia- tion, for opinion .. .. •• Mr. Blaine's views on above proposals. They do not furnish a possible basis •• •• Telegram from Canada giving views of Government as to conditions of negotiation Acknowledges No. 350. Matter receiving can.est consideration ... Refers to No. 387. Despatches from Canada forwarding claims of H Juanita" and "Pathfinder -. in detail.. .. .. •• .. Telegram to Canada recapitulating points in No. 252 Canadian reply to above General concurrence, to avoid delay .. General remarks on above. The negotiations might now commence, the wishes of Canada being consulted .. .. Acknowledges No. 255. The clsims therein will he considered with others .. .. .. Answers No. 253. Gives substance of Canadian reply in No. 257 .. • • Substance of No. 358. To make a formal com- .munication to United States' Government in its sense .. ,. .. .. Copy of above .. Receipt of No. 361. Reasons for wishing to defer communication .. .. .. •. Answers above. STay defer communication Extract from Report of Secretary of Treasury for 1889 on the Seal Islands in Behring Sea Discussion with Mr. Blaine as to compensation for seisnrea.. .. .. .. Amplifies the above .. .. .. .. Advertisement by Secretary of the Treasury for tenders for fur-seal contract for twenty-one years .. .. .. " Triumph," '* Lily," " Black Diamond." Detailed clsims for losses .. .. .. .. " Ariel." Claim for compensation, with declarations .. ., .. ., New fur-seal contract (see No. 268). Resolution by Senator Plumb.. .. .. . Answer of the United States' Government to protest made on 13th October against the seizures of British vessels. Detailed arguments Acknowledges above. Formal reply will be sent. Sends terms for negotiation. Would Mr. Blaine be likely to accept them as basis ? Answers above. Thinks he should bsve more information about amount of compensation claimed before negotiating for close season .. " Kate." Sends claims for compensation Answers No. 374. Claims amount to about 500,000 dollars, subject to revision Claims rc\ ised at Colonial Office, and should not exceed 400,000 dollars .. .. '.'_« Ask for observations on No. 273 .. ■/•» Claims for compensation. That of the " Minnie " nil! have to be added .. Discussion with Mr. Hlaine on amount of compensation claims, and question of arbitration. Hit proposals .. .. .. May tripartite negotiation for close time begin, leaving; claims arbitration in suspense ? .. Copy of No. 380. Propose to answer No. 381 in affirmative .. .. .. .. fC5 £65 3C6 867 3C8 877 378 878 379 379 380 3S0 881 3b) 881 383 883 383 383 392 395 S96 899 399 400 403 403 403 403 403 404 404 TABLE OF CONTENTS. No. 283 284 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 fs- 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 Name. To Sir J. Pauncefote Colonial Office .. .. Sir J. Pauncefote .. . • Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley (Telegraphic) To Sir J. Pauncefote .. Sir J. Pauncefote .. To Sir J. Pauncefote To Sir R. Morier .. Sir R. Morier .. Colonial Office .. Sir J. Pauncefote .. To Colonial Office.. Colonial Office To Sir J. Pauncefote Sir J. Pauncefote .. To Sir J. Pauncefote Colonial Office .. To Sir J. Pauncefote Sir J. Pauncefote .. Date. Feb. 10, 1890 11, II, 12, 12, 13, 13, 13, 14, 14, 23, 22 22, 24, 27, 28, 11, 20, Mar. 8, 14, 15, 1, To Sir J. Pauncefote Colonial Office .. To Colonial Office.. Sir J. Pauncefote .. To Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) Colonial Office Sir J. Pauncefote .. Colonial Office » >, Sir J. Pauncefote >' » » » (Telegraphic) 7, 19, 19, 20, 26, 21, 21, Apr. 3, 9, Mar. 31, Apr. 14, 19, 11, 15, 26, Subject. Answers No. 281 in affirmative Remarks by Canadian Government on call for tenders alluded to in No. 268 Refers to above. Mr. Blaine consents .. Substance of No. 285 All proposals from United States to be received ad referendum To arrange with Governor-General date when Canadian Representative should be in Washington to assist .. .. . • • • As to Russian participation .. .. .. Refers to No. 2S9. Has written to Canada Refers to No. 271. Copy of No. 284 .. To invite Russian participation.. .. .. Russian Minister will take part " Minnie " —claim for compensation, thus completing the list for 1889 .. First informal meeting-. Submits area proposed by Mr. Blaine and M. Struve .. ".. Copy of above, for opinion .. Remarks on No. 2S)6. Sir J. Pauncefote should confer with Mr. Tupper Answers No. 296. Consult Mr. Tupper . Memorandum by Mr. Blaine of his views on arbitration question .. .. .. .. Russian Government said to have renewed the Alaska Commercial Company's lease of Russian Seal Islands in Behring Sea . . Approves language in No. 280.. .. .. Remarks on Nos. 280 and 300. Important to know Canadian views .. Refers to Nos. 280 and 286. Copy of No. 303 .. Further informal conversation with Mr. Blaine and Mr. Tupper .. .. .. Fur-seal Islands said to have been leased to American Commercial Company at large increase .. .. .. .. .. Acknowledges receipt of No. 288 Negotiations come to deadlock owing to difference of opinion about a close season .. .. .. Approves proceedings reported in No. 305 Forwards schedule of claims for compensation received from Canada .. .. Copy of No. 308. Propose to wait .. .. Usual Proclamation as to Behring Sea fisheries about to issue .. .. Refers to No. 305. Report of first formal meeting. Has prepared a draft scheme which Mr. Tupper has taken to Canada for consideration .. Article from " Tribune," of New York, headed " Rights in Behring Sea " .. Approves principle of draft Convention referred to in No. 313 .. .. .. Answers No. 311. Agree to wait Newspaper extract relative to detention of the " Pathfinder" at Portland on charge connected with her last year's arrest. Her release by order of Treasury .. .. .. .. Telegram from Canada giving first impressions of draft Convention .. .. .. .. Canada accepts draft with suggested modifications .. Result of interview with Mr. Tupper on his return from Canada. Submits fresh draft Correspondence relating to the fisheries as received from Mr. Blaine, including evidence of United States' experts and counter-evidence furnished by Mr, Tupper .. .. Has received Canadian amendments to draft Convention, and proposes submitting it to Conference .. 405 405 407 407 407 407 408 408 408 408 409 409 412 412 412 413 413 414 414 415 415 415 416 416 417 417 417 418 419 419 420 421 421 421 422 422 423 423 453 1 TABLE OP CONTENTS. xi No. Name. Date. Subject. Page 453 323 Sir J. Pauncefote .. .. Apr. 30, 1890 Has sent in draft Convention .. .. .. (Telegraphic) 324 n » • • • ■ 25, Refers to No. 304. Views of Canada as to procedure in regard to arbitration and assessment of damages . .. .. •. 454 325 To Colonial Office.. .. May 5, Copy of above, for remarks .. .. .. 454 326 Sir J. Pauncefote .. .. Apr: 29, Copy of letter to Mr Blaine sending in draft Convention as approved by Canadian Government. Sends copy of it 455 327 Colonial Office .. ., May 8, Answers No. 325. Criticisms on No. 324 .. 459 328 To Sir J. Pauncefote .. 8, What does Mr. Blaine say to draft sent home in (Telegraphic) No. 3-i6? 460 329 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 8, Answers above. Mr. Blaine maintains silence. May he say the draft is approved by Her Majesty's Government ? 460 330 To Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 9, Answers above in affirmative .. 460 331 >j ft •• 9, Answers No. 324. Copy of No. 327. To consult Mr. Tupper in first place .. .. .. 460 332 ,, ,» • • 10, Approves note in No. 326 .. .. 461 333 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 11, Refers to No. 329. Mr. Blaine does not accept diaft in present form, but thinks it offers a basis .. .. .. .. .. 461 334 i, i, • . . • (Telegraphic) 11, Answers No. 331. Has prepared draft Arbitration Agreement, which Mr. Tupper will take to Canada for approval .. .. ». 461 335 i> » *. .. (Telegraphic)) 14, Mr. Tupper not gone. Draft sent by post .. 461 336 To Sir J. Pauncefote 22, Answers No. 272. States views of Her Majesty's Government in reply to United States' arguments in support of seizures .'. 462 337 Sir J. Pauncefote .. (Telegraphic) 22, British counter-proposals rejected. Orders given to revenue-cruizer to dismantle British sealers. Interview with Mr. Blaine to remonstrate. His reply 465 338 Extract from " Morning 23, Reuter's telegram announcing orders given to dis- Post " ' mantle sealers .. .. . .. 466 339 To Sir J. Paui.cefote (Telegraphic) 23, Answers No. 337. To warn Mr. Blaine that a formal protest is being prepared against any interference with British vessels 466 340 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 23, Answers above. Has sent in note .. .. 466 341 To Sir J. Pauncefote .. 24, Refers to No. 336. Explains why the answer was delayed. In consequence of news in No. 337, it should now be presented. Hopes United States' Government will take such action as may obviate necessity for a formal protest 466 342 « n .» 29, Refers to No. 337. Regret with which Her Majesty's Government has learnt news. Sends dratt of formal protest to be sent in if unfortunately necessary 467 343 Sir J. Pauncefote .. (Telegraphic) 30, Negotiations for close season. Long note has come in from United Slates' Government reviewing their history. It concludes with the hope that British vessels will be prevented by Her Majesty's Government from entering Behring Sea 468 344 To Sir J. Pauncefote 31, Answers above. The proposal to prevent British (Telegraphic) vessels cannot be accepted 469 345 Sir J. Pauncefote .. .. 23, Refers to No. 337. Newspaper extracts on subject of instructions 469 346 „ ,, .. • * 23, Amplifies information given in No. 337, and details conversation with Mr. Blaine 472 347 „_ »> »• 23, Note to Mr. Blaine founded on No. 339 472 348 To Sir J. Pauncefote June 3, British sealers have already started, so cannot now (Telegraphic) be stopped ( see No. 344) 473 349 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) T, Gives substance of a long note elicited bv statement (see No. 344) that Her Majesty's Government cannot stop sealers, in which Presidents regret is expressed at action of Her Majesty's Government. Has declined to continue correspondence pending instructions .. .. .. 473 350 (Telegraphic) 7, Proposed interview with Mr. Blaine put off 474 1 1 fl28] C xu TABLE OF CONTENTS. No. Name. Date. Subject. Page- 351 To Sir J. Pauncefote June 7, 1890 Answers No. 349. Explains position of Her Majesty's Government in regard to sealers, and readiness to negotiate for close season . 474 352 Sir J. Pauncefote .. May 29, Refers to No. 347. Mr. Blaine acknowledges notice of formal protest 474 353 ,5 „ - . . • 30, Refers to No. 343. Sends copy of-note in which draft Convention is rejected by Russia and the United States .. ■ ■ • -• 475 354 (Telegraphic) June 10, Interview with Mr. Blaine, who declines to give formal assurance as to non-interference. Proposes to send in protest on 14th instant 478 355 ,i ,, 10, At previous interview gave Mr. Blaine explanations (Telegraphic) contained in No. 351 .. .- .. 479 356 :? „ > - •. 11, Correspondence with Mr. Blaine about stoppage of sealers by Her Majesty's Government. Mr. Hlaine suggests a Proclamation requesting them to abstain for present season .. .. - - .. 479 357 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 11, Answers No. 354. May present protest.. 480 358 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 1, Refers to No. 356. Would Her Majesty's Clovern- menl. refer to arbitration question of legal right of United States' Government to exclude British sealers ? If so, would they issue Proclamation on conditions as to compensation for past and prospective damages ? . 480 359 To Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 12, Answers above. Serious difficulties ; but if Proclamation were issued, would United States' Government agree to specified conditions? 480 360 ,» ,• 12, Gives rough form in which Proclamation might run, (Telegraphic) if issued . 481 361 Sir J. Pauncefote 3, Tlie United States' Government having suggested that a Proclamation excluding sealers for this season should be issued, he has replied that it is impossible. Copies of correspondence . .. 481 362 Colonial Office .. ., 13, Claim from owners of " Pathfinder" for her detention in .Neag'n Bay in March last (see No. 317) 482 363 Sir J. Pauncefote 6, Refers to Nos. 349 and 361. Correspondence with Air. Hlaine on subject of proposed exclusion of sealers 484 364 Colonial Office 17, Extract from Annual Report for 1889 of Canadian 0/.1T Admiralty Minister of Marine and Fisheries 486 365 19, Letters from Captain Huiton, of Her Majesty's ship " Amphion," giving names of British sealers, their owners, &c, and their probable movements Refers to No. 353. Explains, by copies of corre 488 366 To Sir J. Pauncefote 20, spondence, &c, position of Her Majesty's Govern ment in regard to the negotiations of the spring of 1888, and corrects impressions received by Mr. Blaine as to any formal engagement having then 367 been given 491 c- 't ,, H •• 20, Approves note in No. 361 Newspaper telegrams reporting that United States' 493 368 Sir J. Pauncefote (Telegraphic) 21, Revenue cruisers have- not vet left for Behring 369 To Sir J. Pauncefote 21, Sea Approves note in No. 363. Remarks on an observation by Mr. Phelps in 1888 as to electioneering 493 370 Sir J. Pauncefote .. 10, difficulties in way of then concluding negotiations Refers to No. 305. Copy of Memorandum given to Mr. Blaine explaining inability of Her Majesty's 493 371 Government to stop sealers 494 >> >• (Telegraphic) 25, Refers to No. 359. May he send in official note formulating conditions in regard to issue of a 372 Colonial Office 25, Proclamation ? .. Minute by Canadian- Privy Council recommending that an assurance be sought that sealers will not 494 373 To Sir J. Pauncefote „. T „ (Telegraphic) 26, be interfered with . . . .. Entirely concurs in proposal in No. 371 .. 495 496 374 bir J. Pauncefote .. .. July 1, Copy of note from Mr. Blaine in answer to arguments in No. 336, in which he dwells at length on undisputed rights of Russia, and cjaims them for the United States, and again asks by what right and on what grounds the present action of Her Majesty's Government is defended ? .. i 497 TABLE )NTKNT! No. Name. Date. Subject. Page 375 Sir J. Pauncefote .. .. Juiv 3, 1890 Mr. Blaine will continue negotiations at Bar Har (Telegraphic) 5*5£ bour .. .. .. 506 376 n »9 •• •• June 18, Refers to No. 357- Copy of protest sent in on 14th, and of note covering it •. 506 '» If • • * " 27, Sends article from " New York Herald " purporting to give authoritative version of the story of the negotiations .. .. .. 508 3?K n ft • • * * 27, Copy of note to Mr. Blaine founded on authority given in No. 373 .. .. «."*'£ 510 379 »» ■ • • • . • July 9, Resolution adopted in Houso of Representatives for (Telegraphic) publishing correspondence . • . • .. 511 380 To Sir J. Pauncefote 10. Approves note in No. 378 .. ., 511 381 ,, „ .. 10, Approves note in No. 876 5)2 382 11 ,, «• Aug. 2, Acknowledges No. 374. Replies at length to the arguments deduced from alleged Russian rights of jurisdiction over Behring Sea. Quotes American contentions dating from 1822, opinions of publicists as to limits of maritime jurisdiction, and diplomatic documents of 1822, 1823, and 1824. Her Majesty's Government are ready, if necessary, to refer to arbitration question of legality of recent captures, with the issues that depend upon it .. , „ .. ,. 519 o Correspondence respecting the Behring Sea Seal Fisheries : 1886-90. No. 1. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 1.) Sir, Downing Street, September 1, 1886. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, to be laid before the Earl of Iddesleigh, a copy of a letter from the Admiralty, with its inclo9ure, respecting the alleged seizure of three British Columbian seal schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer | Corwin." T am to suggest, for the consideration of Lord Iddesleigh, that the matter should be brought before the United States' Government, with the view of obtaining further information on the subject. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure 1 in No. 1. Admiralty to Colonial Office. Sir, Admiralty, August 26, 1886. I AM commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit herewith, for the perusal of the Secretary of State, a telegram which has been received from the Commander-in-chief on the Pacific Station, dated at Victoria, 24th instant, respecting the seizure of three. British Columbian seal schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin." I am, &c. (Signed) R. D. AWDRY. Inclosure 2 in No. 1. [Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culme-Seymour to Admiralty. (Telegraphic.) Victoria, August 24, 1886. THREE British Columbian seal schooners seized [byj United States' Revenue cruizer I Corwin," Behring's Straits, seaward 70 miles from off the land [? in the execution ot] killing female seals, and using fire-arms to do it, which they have done for three years without interference, although in company with " Corwin." No. 2. The Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, September 9, 1886. I TRANSMIT to you herewith a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office, and of its inclosure, respecting the alleged seizure of three British Columbian seal schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin ; "* and I have to instruct you to address a [128] * No. 1. B m communication to the United States' Government asking to be furnished with particulars which they may possess relative to this occurrence. 1 am, &c. any (Signed) IDDESLEIGH. No. 3. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 27.) Sir, Downing Street, September 25, 1880. WITH reference to the capture of Canadian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea by the United States' Revenue cruizer "Corwin," I am directed by Mr. Secretary Stanhope to transmit to you, to be laid before the Earl of Iddesleigh, a telegram from the Officer administering the Government of the Dominion, together with a copy of a letter from the Admiralty, with its inclosures, on the subject. I am to state that, in Mr. Stanhope's opinion, the case is one in which a protest should be made to the United States' Government, accompanied by a demand for compensation, and that Sir L. West might be instructed to make such protest and demand, if, upon inquiry, he ascertains that the United States' Government maintain the pretension, raised by the seizure of these vessels on the high seas. W&' I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 3. Administrator Lord A. E. Russell to Mr. Stanhope. (Telegraphic.) September 22, 1886. THE Canadian schooners "Thornton," | Onward " and | Carolina" were seized on the 1st August in Behring's Sea by. the United States'cutter "Corwin." The captain and mate of the "Thornton" were tried in the District Court of the United States at Sitka on the.30th August. It was attempted to show that the " Thornton " was seized for killing seal about 70 miles, south-south-east of St..George's Island, within that portion of Behring's Sea ceded by Russia to the United States.. The Judge, in charging the jury, quoted Article I of the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867, between the United States and Russia, and affirmed that all waters within -1n%' boundary set forth in the Treaty to the western end of the Aleutian Archipelago and Islands were to be deemed American, and that the penalties of the Law against the killing of fur-bearing anirnals were to attach to its violation within the limits in question. The jury were told, if'they believed the evidence as to the killing of any fur-bearing animals by the accused on the Alaskan coast or in Behring's Sea, east of the 193rd degree of west longitude, to find them guilty. The prisoners were found guilty. The master of the " Thornton " was fined 500 dollars and sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days. The mate was fined 300 dollars and sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment. The'officers of the other two vessels were also tried, and similar penalties imposed upon them. The Government of Canada protests against the claim of the United States to the sole sovereignty over Behring's Sea, 700 miles east of the westerly boundary of Alaska, defined by the above-mentioned Article. I of the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867, as contrary to the admitted principles of international law, and also in opposition to 'the United States' contention concerning common waters on the coast of the Atlantic. It protests also against the unwarranted and arbitrary interference of the authorities of the United States with the peaceable and lawful occupation on the high seas of Canadian citizens, as well as against the forfeiture of their property and the indignity of imprisonment which have been imposed upon them. The foregoing facts have also been communicated to Sir Lionel West. Inclosure 2 in No. 3. Admiralty to, Colonial Office. bviittO fy&i o) o(i!« S/ffi* \>^ilP ^.Admiralty, September 20, 1886. ^^a^.-Jw^rJ^/^ommanded by my Lords. Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit tpjjspij, in original, for the perusal of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, a-letter from thje Commander-in-chief on the Pacific Station, dated the 25th August, respecting the seizure of three sealing schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin," on the plea of their killing female seals. I am to request that these papers may be sent to the Foreign Office, to be returned to this Department when done with. I am, &c. (Signed) ' EVAN MACGREGOR. i Inclosure 3 in No. 3. Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culme-Seymour to Admiralty. Sir, Triumph," at Esquimalt, August 25, 1886. IN confirmation of my telegram of the 23rd instant, I have the honour to inform you of the particulars, as far as I can at present ascertain them, of the seizure of the three sealing schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin," a small screvy steamer. The schooners are:— "Thornton," auxiliary screw, 22 tons, Captain J. D. Warren, owner. | Carolina," sailing, 32 tons, William Munsie, owner. "Onward," sailing, 35 tons, W. Spring, owner. All belonging to Victoria, British Columbia. The schooner which was seized nearest to land was 50 miles from St. George Island, the other two rather further off. All three were towed by the "Corwin'' to Ounalaska, the captain and one man retained on board, and the remainder of the crew sent to San Francisco by a steamer going there, when they were set free, and sent on here at the expense of the owners, arriving on the night of the 22nd instant. Their arrival at San Francisco was the first we heard of the schooners being seized. Nothing has been disturbed on board the schooners, except that the arms and ammunition have been seized, and sufficient provision for the crew on their passage to San Francisco taken. 2. There are ten other sealing schooners from Victoria in the Behring's Sea. The season is from about the 1st July to the end of August. If not seized, they are probably on their way here, and may be expected to arrive the middle of September. The question of whether they should be protected or not does not, therefore, at present arise. Last year there were two schooners from here in the Behring's Sea, and I am assured the | Corwin " spoke them four or five times without interfering. In 1884 only,one schooner was there. The success of these has caused thirteen to be fitted out this season. \ii)&$* Xinclose.copies of the following,as bearing on the-subject:— (1.) Letter from captain of " Thornton " to owner. J&P.' (2.) Letter from captain of " Carolina " to owner. (3.) Letter from MivBoutweU, Secretary United States' Treasury. (4;) A warning published in San Francisco papers and copied into British Columbian papers. (5.) Letter and telegrams between Mr. Lubbe and Mr. Crow-Baker, M.P. for Victoria. (6.) A letter from the American newspaper " Oregpnian."* 1 had .hoped, to have inclosed a copy of the lease from the United States to the Alaska Commercial Company, and a copy of the depositions of the crews on arrival at Victoria, but the only copy of the lease in Victoria, as also the depositions, have been taken away by the Honourable G. E. Foster,-Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, who was here on the 23rd, and left yesterday morning. I have telegraphed to him for copies, and will forward them as soon as received. * Not printed. [128] B 2 4 4. I would call attention to the Treaty concerning the cession of the Russian possessions in North America to the United States, concluded 30th March, 1867, as also to the Convention between Great Britain and Russia, signed 16th (28th) February, 1825, and beg to make the following observations :— An American Company, called the "Alaska Commercial Company," have a lease from the United States, dated 1870, of the Islands of St. Paul and St. George for twenty years, with the right to kill 100,000 seals annually on the islands and | waters adjacent." A United States' officer is stationed on these islands to see the terms of the lease properly carried out, and the "Corwin" is also there for this purpose. By the terms of the lease, fire-arms are not to be used to kill the seals, nor may female seals or seals under one year old be killed. 5. It would appear by Inclosure No. 4* that the United States claim the whole of the Behring's Sea, bounded on the south by the Aleutian Islands, and, as laid down in the Treaty of 1867, as American territory. It would seem impossible to sustain this, for it would appear to be the " high sea," and not Russia's to cede, and this line mentioned in the Treaty only meant to include the islands within it, and not the sea. I beg to draw special attention to the letter from Mr. Boutwell in 1872 (Inclosure No. 3).f Mr. Boutwell was then the United States' Secretary to the Treasury, and he distinctly states his Government could not interfere beyond a marine league from the shore. Mr. Boutwell was, I am told, greatly instrumental in procuring the lease of St. Paul and St. George for the Alaska Commercial Company, and was therefore interested in excluding sealing vessels from the Behring's Sea. 6. I may mention that female seals cannot be distinguished from males when killed asleep on the water at sea; the seals killed by the Alaska Commercial Company are all clubbed on land, when the difference of sex can be easily seen; but that does not really affect the question as I view il, which is simply whether the Behring's Sea is the "high | sea," or not. If,- as I take it, Behring's Sea is the " high sea," I presume no vessel fishing there can be legally interfered with. 7. The "San Diego" referred to in Inclosures 1 and 2| is an American schooner; and was taken and confiscated, I am informed, for landing and killing 500 seals on land, contrary to United States' law. 8. Inclosure 5,§ from a gentleman in Victoria interested in sealing, and the telegraphic answers, show that the owners of the schooners sent them up with their eyes open, and were aware they ran a risk of being seized. 9. Inclosure 6^[ is a letter in an American newspaper, the " Oregonian," published at Portland, Oregon, and shows the view taken by many Americans on the subject. I have, &c. (Signed) M. CULME-SEYMOUR. P.S. Port Moody, August 27, 1886.—The depositions alluded to having just arrived, I inclose them. * M. C-S. Inclosure 4 in No. 3. Captain H. Guttermann [?] to Captain J. D. Warren. Sir, Schooner " Thornton," in Port Ilioluk, Ounalaska, August 7, 1886. AS this is my first opportunity to let you know that on the 1st August at 6 p.m.—my position 55° 45' north latitude, 168° 44' west longitude—having on board 403 seal-skins, all-well on board, when United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin " placed an officer on board, took arms and ammunition, took us in tow. At 8 p.m. stopped and took schooner "Carolina" in tow. August 2 at 6 a.m. stopped and took schooner "Onward. At noon latitude 54 30', longitude 167° 18*. At 8-40 p.m. brought us to anchor in above-mentioned port; took all the boats from the schooner; put a watchman on board from the cutter. August 3. At 9 a.m. an officer from the cutter came on board and took the ship's papers. August 4. An officer from the cutter returned one boat, and gave four of the crew liberty to go on shore from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m., at the discretion of me. * See Inclosure 7 in No. 3. § See Inclosur.' 8 in No. 3. + See Inclosure 6 in No. 3. || See Inclosure 9 in No. 3. J See Inclosures 4 arid 5 in No. 3. ^ See Inclosure 9 in No. 3. August 5. Nothing done to remark. August 6. Ditto. August 7. At 9 A.M. an officer" from the cutter' came on board ; took some provisions from the schooner. At 3 p.m. took ten men, and are going to be sent to San Francisco immediately with steamer " San Paule," as leaves just now. " San Diego " is seised and stripped here. I have put in my protest. My latest news from the rest of Victoria schooners is "' doing well." I know not more just now, and remain, yours, &c. (Signed) H. GUTTERMANN [?]. Mv protest is as follows:— " I, H. Gutterman [?], master of British schooner 'Thornton,' do hereby declare that 1 do not know wherein I have violated the laws of the United States or other nations in taking seals beyond the usual limit of 3 leagues [? miles] from shore within Behring's Sea, and I therefore enter this my solemn protest against the action of the United States' authorities in seizing this the vessel under my command, together with the seal-skins composing cargo." (Excuse haste.) H. G. Inclosure 5 in No. 3. Captain J. Ogilvie to Mr. W. Munsie. Dear Sir, - Ounalaska, August 6, 1886. THE United States' steamer " Corwin " boarded and took charge of the schooner in latitude 55° 50' north, longitude 168° 53' west. They took all the fire-arms from the schooner. I asked why they did so. They said for killing female seals and carrying firearms. They towed the " Thornton " and " Onward " in at the same time. I have got 686 seal-skins on board, "Thornton" 404, "Onward"700. I have heard nothing of the " Pathfinder " in the Behring's Sea ; she was seen off Sitka coming up. It was on the 1st August, at 6 P.M., they took charge of the schooner. The American schooner " San Diego " is in here, they are taking all her skins and sails on shore; 500 skins. Your, &c. (Signed) JAMES OGILVIE. Inclosure 6 in No. 3. Mr. Boutwell to Mr. Phelps. Sir, Treasury Department, Washington, April 19, 1872. YOUR letter of the 25th ultimo was duly received, calling the attention of the Department to certain rumours circulating in San Francisco to the effect that expeditions are to start from Australia and the Hawaiian Islands to take fur-seals on their annual migration to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, through the narrow pass of Unmark. You recommend, to cut off the responsibility of evil resulting to the interest of the United States from these expeditions, that a Revenue cutter be sent to the region of Unmark Pass, by the 16th May next. A very full conversation was had with Captain Bayant upon this subject while he was at the Department, and he convinced it to be entirely impracticable to make such an expedition a paying one, inasmuch as the seals go singly or in pairs, and not in droves, and cover a large region of water in their homeward travel to these islands, and he did not seem to fear that the seals would be driven from their accustomed resorts, even were such attempts made. In addition, I do not see that the United States would have the jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for that purpose, unless they made such attempt within a marine league of the shore. As at present advised, I do not think it expedient to carry out your suggestion, but I will thank you to communicate to the Department any further facts or information you may be able to gather upon the subject. I am, &c. (Signed) GEO. S. BOUTWELL, Secretary. Inclosure 7 in No. 3. 0B& Extract from the " Daily British Colonist" of April 6, 1886. i Alaska Seal Catching.—The story goes that some -poachers were fitting out in San Francisco to kill seals on the Federal preserves in Alaskaft<waters. To warn all such parties Secretary Manning addressed the .following note to Collector Hager :— "Sir " Treasury Department, March 16, 1886. '" I transmit herewith, for your information, a copy of a letter addressed^ by the Department on the 12th March, 1881, to D. A. D'Ancona, concerning the jurisdiction of the United States in the waters of the Territory of Alaska, and the prevention of the killing of fur-seals and other fur-bearing animals within such areas, as prescribed by Chapter 5, Title 23 of the Revised Statutes. The attention of your predecessor in office ■was called to this subject on the 4th April, 1881. This communication is addressed to you, inasmuch as it is understood that certain parties at- your port contemplate the fitting out of expeditions to kill fur-seals in these waters. You are requested to give due publicity to such letters, in order that such parties may be informed of the construction placed by this Department upon the provision of law referred to. " Respectfully yours, (Signed) " D. Manning, Secretary. 1 Collector of Customs, San Francisco." Upon reference to back files we find the full explanation of this note in the letter referred to, which is as follows :— "Sir, "Treasury Department, March 12, 1881. "Your letter of the 19th ultimo, requesting certain information in regard to the meaning placed by this Department upon the Law regulating the killing of fur-bearing animals in the Territory of Alaska, was duly received,. I The Law prohibits the killing of any fur-bearing animals, except as otherwise therein provided,- within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof,.apd also prohibits the killing of any fur-seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, or in the waters adjacent thereto, except during certain months. "You inquire in regard to the interpretation of the terms ' waters there' and f waters adjacent thereto,' as used in the Law, and how far the jurisdiction of the United States is to be understood as extending. "Presuming your inquiry to relate more especially to the waters of Western Alaska, you are informed that the Treaty with Russia of the 30th March, 1870,* by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States, defines the boundary of the territory so ceded. This Treaty is found on pp. 671 to 673 of the volume of Treaties of the Revised Statutes. It will be seen, therefore, that the limit of the cession extends from a line starting from the Arctic Ocean, and running through Behring's Strait to the north of St. Lawrence Islands. " The line runs thence in a south-westerly direction, so as to pass midway between the Island of Attou and Copper Island of the Kormansborski Couplet or Group" of the North Pac fie Ocean, to meridian of 173° west longitude. All the-waters within that boundary to the western end of the Aleutian Archipelago and chain of islands are considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska Territory. • H - " All the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing- animals -would therefore attach against any violation of law within the limits before described. • I Very respectfully, (Signed) " H. F. FRENCH, Acting Secretary. "D. A. D'Ancona, J y 717, O'Farrell Street, San Francisco, California." All parties are warned that the rule laid down by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States in 1881, and reaffirmed in the note of Secretary Manning to the Collector of this port of date of the 16th March, 1886, will be rigidly enforced against all who attempt to poacn upon the Federal preserve bv killing seals within its limits, there laid down and defined, in the \vaters of Alaska. From that preserve the Federal Government oenves revenue, and its lessee is entitled to the protection proffered bv the note of the Secretary referred to. * ? 1S67. Inclosure 8 in No. 3. Mr. F. Lubbe to Mr. E. Crow-Baker, M.P. Dear. Sir, Victoria, British Colombia, March 30, 1886. THE inclosed clipping explains itself. The question I^ish to ask you is, Can the United States claim the easterly,half of Behring's Sea as American waters ? The British schooners " Mary Ellen," " Favourite," " Onward," | Grace," " Dolphin, "Anna Beck," "Wm. P. Sayward," "Mary Taylor," "Carolina," "Alfred Adams," and "Active" intend to follow the seals into Behring's Sea at the end of the seal-fishing season off the British Columbia coast, say the 20th May next. These schooners would spear- and shoot seals upon the high seas, and have no occasion to go within 30 miles of any-land. You are aware that the British schooner "Mary Ellen" has already made two successful voyages to the Behring's Sea; the "Favourite" made also a successful voyage during 1885. Both these vessels were spoken by an American Revenue cruizer in Behring's Sea last summer, but not in any way molested. ' Would it not be well for you to obtain from the Minister of Marine in Ottawa a written opinion,, and, further, would you be good enough-to communicate to me the substance of such opinion by wire ? Please act promptly, and oblige vours, &c. (Signed) F. LUBBE. Warning to Seal Hunters. The Treasury Department, having become informed that certain parties are fitting out expeditions for the purpose of killing fur-seals and other fur-bearing animals in Alaska waters, gives the following information to parties concerned, as to how far the jurisdiction of the United States extends in the matter. The Treaty with-Russia of the 30th March, 1870, by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States; defines the boundary of the territory>so ceded. It will be seen therefrom thai the limit of the cession extends from a line starting from the Arctic Ocean and running through Behring's Straits to the north of St. Lawrence Islands. The line runs thence in.a south-westerly direction, so as to pass midway between the Island of. Attou and Cooper Island, of the Kromanboski couplet or group, in the North Pacific Ocean, to meridian 173° west longitude. All the. waters-within that boundary to the western end of the Aleutian Archipelago and chain of islands are considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska Territory. All the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing animals would therefore attach. against any violation of law, within the limits described. (Telegraphic.) so ?-Your matt Minister Justice. Mr. A. Crow-Baker to Mr. F. Lubbe. progressing expeditiously as possible. Referred Will advise you when decision! s reached. April 20. by . Council to - Mr. E. C. Rowbotham to Mr. F. Lubbe. (Telegraphic.) May 30. Minister Justice gives opinion in your favour and against American contention. He has recommended attention of Imperial Government being called to the subject in order that views of Canadian Government be then sustained and enforced. Inclosure 9 in No. 3. Declarations. I, WILLIAM MUNSIE, of' Victoria, grocer, do solemnly and sincerely declare that I am sole owner of the schooner " Carolina," and she has a Canadian register, having been registered at the port of Victoria. The vessel and her outfit at the time she left for m 8 Behring's Sea was 7,000 dollars, and I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled " An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) WM. MUNSIE. Taken and declared before me at Victoria, this 23rd August, 1886. (Signed) M. W. Tjtkwhitt Drake. J.P. I, Thomas McLaedy, of Victoria, British Columbia, cook, do solemnly and sincerely declare that I was engaged as cook on board the British schooner " Carolina," and I was on board when the United States' steamer "Corwin" seized her. During the whole time the said schooner was sealing she never sighted land once. After she was seized the "Corwin "took her in tow about 6 oclock in the evening, and about 3 o'clock in the morning the English schooner "Onward," of the tonnage 35'20 tons, was also seized and taken in tow to Ounalaska. Her crew were left on board and not removed to San Francisco; she had seal-skins on board. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled " An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) T. McLAEDY. Taken and declared before me this 23rd August, 1886, at Victoria, British Columbia. (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, J.P. I, Edward Shields, of Sooke District, Vancouver Island, a hunter, engaged on board the British schooner " Carolina," of 31*90 registered tonnage, do solemnly and sincerely declare that I left Victoria on board the aforesaid schooner on the 20th May, 1886, bound on a voyage to Behring's Sea for the purpose of sealing. The schooner was fitted out for this purpose. She had eleven hands on board, including the master, by name James Ogilvie. We sailed to Behring's Sea and commenced sealing on the 15th June, and at that time we were about 300 miles from land, and we continued cruizing about for seals, and up to the time the United States' vessel " Corwin " seized us we had 686 seals. During the whole time we were cruizing about we were in the open sea, out of sight of any land. The seals we obtained were chiefly females. At the time the "Corwin" seized us on the 1st August we were out of sight of land and in latitude 55" 50' north, longitude 168° 53' west, as 1 was informed and verily believe. There were other vessels, both American and English, cruizing about in the same neighbourhood. We never killed a seal in the neighbourhood of the Aleutian Islands. I was away in the boats when the " Corwin " seized the vessel, and when I came back I found the " Carolina " in tow of the " Corwin." The captain of the | Corwin," Abbey by name, took away all the fire-arms, consisting of rifles and shot-guns, ten in all, and I was taken to Ounalaska, and from there 1 was taken to San Francisco by the steamer " St. Paul," and there turned adrift. The " Carolina" was left at Ounalaska with the seals and outfit, and I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled " An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) EDWARD SHIELDS. of law Taken and declared before me at Victoria, this 23rd day of August, 1836, in due for m (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, J.P. 9 1, John Dallas, of Victoria, British Columbia, seaman, do solemnly and sincerely declare that I was engaeed- about the end of May 1886 as a seaman on board the schooner " Thornton," of 22*30 registered tonnage, registered in the Dominion of Canada as a' British vessel. I was engaged sealing on the west coast of Vancouver Island, and when, the seals got scarce the " Thornton " left [? Clayoquot] Vancouver Island, for Behring's Sea about beginning of June, and three days after passing Unmark Pass we killed our first seal, being then about 250 miles from land. We were engaged sealing in the open sea until the 1st August. We had a little over 400 skins on board, when the United States' steamer " Corwin" seized our vessel and took her to Ounalaska. They were about twenty-eight hours engaged in towing us to Ounalaska. The master of the "Corwin" removed all our guns and ammunition—:ten guns in all. There were fourteen hands on board the "Thornton1' altogether, including two Indians, nine white men, and a Chinese ,ook—were sent to San Francisco and there discharged. Two white men and two Indians were left on board the schooner at Ounalaska. We were 5 or 6 miles from the " Carolina " at the time we were seized. I saw no other vessels in sight at the time. We were never in sight of land during the whole time we were sealing. And I make this declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled "An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) JOHN DALLAS, his X mark. Taken and declared before me at Victoria, this 23rd day of August, 1886, the same having been first read over to him. (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, J.P. No. 4. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleig/i.—(Received October 4.) My Lord, Washington, September 21, 1886. THE reported seizure of British vessels by American cruizers in waters over which it appears the United States' Government claim jurisdiction as adjacent to the Territory of Alaska has given rise to much comment in the newspapers touching the interests of. a powerful commercial Company which may be affected by the international questions arising therefrom | and in this connection I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith a precis of the history of the origin of this Company, as well as of what has been written on the subject. Chapter 3 of the Revised Statutes of the United States (p. 342, sections 1954 to 1976 inclusive) contains the "provisions relating to the unorganized Territory of Alaska;" and section 1954 extends " the laws of the United States to and over all the mainland, islands, and waters of the territory " ceded by Russia to the United States by the Treaty of 1867. In addition the lease of the Government Seal Islands the Alaska Company holds as well leases of certain islands from the Russian Government, so that in faet it may be said to monopolize the seal fur trade in these waters. I I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 4. History of the Origin of the Alaska Commercial Company. THE transfer of the Territory of Alaska to the United States' Government, in compliance with the terms of the Treaty of Purchase between the two Governments, included the transfer of all the Russian Government property, such as public buildings at Sitka, Governor's house, Custom-house, hospital, and wharves, &c. There were, however, certain buildings reserved as the property of the Russian Fur Company, and as General Rousseau, the United States' Commissioner, could not, in his official capacity, take any active or open part in its disposal, Prince MatsukofT, the Russian Governor, concluded a bargain with Mr. Hutchinson, who accompained General Rousseau as his Private Secretary. This bargain included all the property of the Russian Fur Company and [128] C 10 seal-skins stored. It was made on private terms and to the exclusion of the stockholders of the Russian Company and the American officers stationed at Sitka, who claimed that, they were entitled to a share of the spoils. By virtue of this bargain with Prince Matsukoff, who was Governor of the Company, Mr. Hutchinson proposed to take possession of the fur trade of Alaska and the Seal Islands, and left for Victoria (British Columbia) and San Francisco to make the necessary arrangements. At the former place he met with a Mr. Kohl, owner of a British steamer called the " Fidelitor," with whom he entered into partnership, and the firm still exists under the name of Hutchinson, Cole, and Co. The steamer obtained an American register under the plea that she was a Russian vessel at the time of the transfer of the territory to the United States, and was thus enabled to carry on the coasting trade. Preparations were made in 1868 for working the fur trade of the newly-acquired possession,. and especially for the occupation of the Pribylov Islands, to which, by virtue of the arrangements" with Prince Matsukoff, the new Company considered they had an exclusive right. Upon their arrival there, however, they found them occupied by experienced sealers from New London arid Stonington (Connecticut) under one Captain Morgan. A fight for possession seemed imminent, but a division of the season's catch was finally agreed upon. While the two parties were thus amicably at work, M. Pflugel, Russian Vice-Consul at Honolulu, arrived at the bead of an expedition, believing that he should find the islands unoccupied, but was eventually forced to retire before the combined forces of Captain Morgan and Mr. Hutchinson. It now became obvious that the Government must take means to preserve these valuable seal rookeries, and in the winter of 1868 an Act of Congress was passed, the conditions for permission to take seals being, however, reserved for future Congressional action. The coalition between Hutchinson and Morgan still continued, and finally led to the organization of the powerful and wealthy Alaska Commercial Company. Since 1870 tbi& Company has controlled the entire fur trade of Alaska, and by virtue of its alliances with the lessees of the Russian Seal Islands, controls the valuable fur-seal trade of the world. With strong political influence in the Congress of 1876, it obtained a lease of the Pribylov Islands for twenty years at a rental of 55,000 dollars a-year, and a royalty of 2 dol. 62 c. per skin, the take to be limited to 100,000 skins a-year. It is calculated that the Company pays annually 315,000 dollars to the United States' Treasury, which, after paying all the expenses of the Territory, yields more than 4 per cent, per annum on the purchase-money paid to Russia for Alaska. To preserve this revenue through future years the protection of the seals from illegal capture or disturbance on their annual visits to the islands has been deemed an absolute necessity, and hence the prohibition against approaching or landing on the islands and the vigilance of the United States' cruizers in the Behring's Sea. It is not, however, generally understood that the Alaska Company controls the fur trade of all the mainland and islands of Alaska lying west of the 141st meridian of west longitude, and that its operations over this vast extent of territory and coast are entirely distinct from, and have no connection with, its exclusive control of the Seal Islands, which it holds by virtue of its lease from the United States' Government. Outside of these islands it holds no exclusive rights or franchise from the Government, nor does it pay any rent or royalty to the Government on the territory it occupies or the furs it procures from the natives. It has no rights over any other citizen or company of citizens who may desire to trade in competition with it, and yet it has been aided by the Revenue Marine in suppressing competition from rival traders, for it appears; that, under instructions from the Treasury Department, the Revenue cruizers board and examine every trading-vessel sighted in the Behring's Sea or on the north-west coast of Alaska, except the vessels of the Company. If a pretext can be found, an officer is placed on board with instructions to take the vessel to Ounalaska and discharge her cargo. She is then sent to San Francisco, where the United States' Marshal finds that there is no cause for condemnation, and, as the object of breaking up her voyage has been gained, she is released and restored to her owners. The vessels subjected to this treatment come from British Columbia and Japan, and are, it is said, fitted out for contraband trade. Washington, September 1886. m No. 5. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received October 4.) My Lord, Washington, September 21, 1886. Wl'lH reference to my preceding despatch, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copies of correspondence, as published in the newspapers, relative to the seizure of British sealers in Alaska waters. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 5\. Extract from the | New York Herald " of September 21, 1886. The British Sealers—Officers oe some op the trespassing Schooners pined "and imprisoned, Washington, September 20, 1886. ACTING SECRETARY FAIRCHILD has received a telegram from Captain Abbey, commanding the Revenue steamer " Corwin," dated at Nanaimo, British Columbia, which is as follows :— " Respectfully report ' Corwin' here at request of Governor Swineford and Judge Dawson. Have brought here tventy-two British seamen, released from seized sealers. Am to land remaining released American seamen at Port Townsend. Masters and mates of the seized craft have been convicted and sentenced to fines or imprisonment, or both. I made full depositions for libel suits before leaving Sitka," Despatches have been received at the Navy Department from Lieutenant-Commander Nichols, commanding the " Pinta," from Sitka, Alaska, relating to the seizure of the British sealers. In the despatch dated the 28th August be says:— I On the 24th instant the Revenue steamer ' Corwin ' came in, bringing the American vessel ' San Diego,' of San Francisco, seized for catching seals unlawfully. She also reported the seizure of three English schooners for the same offence. The latter weie left at Ounalaska in charge of the United States' Deputy Marshal, the officers, crews, and cargoes being brought here. A large quantity of arms and ammunition was also seized. The matter comes up before the District Court here next week, and it is probable that interesting international questions will come up, as well also as the jurisdiction of the United States over the entire seas in the Arctic and Behring's Seas east of the boundarv- line." In a despatch dated the 2nd September he says that two of the cases have been disposed of as follows :— " The captain and mate of the British schooner 3 Thornton' were tried by jury, found guilty, and sentenced each to imprisonment for thirty days and fined, the captain 500 dollars and the mate 300 dollars. The captain and mate of the American schooner 'San Diego' waived a jury, and were tried before the Court. Both were found" guilty and sentenced, the captain to two months' imprisonment, and the mate to one month's imprisonment. " The cases of the two other British schooners will come up in a day or two. The captain of one of them has disappeared, and, it is supposed, has committed suicide " From an inclosure in one of these despatches it is learned that the | Corwin," when conveying her prizes to port, sighted five other vessels, all doubtless engaged in unlawful sealing. They made sail with all possible haste as soon as the Revenue vessel was sighted, and the latter was unable to follow them without abandoning her prizes. [128J C 2 12 No. 6. Admiralty to Foreign Office—(Received October 11.) ojr Admiralty, October 7, 1886.. I I WITH reference to my letters of the 26th August and the 20th September,* relative to the seizure of British Columbian sealing schooners, 1 am commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit to you, for the perusal of the Secretary ot State for Foreign Affairs, copv of an Act to prevent the extermination of fur-bearing animals in Alaska, together with copy of the lease of the United States to the Alaska Commercial Company to take fur-seals in the Territory of Alaska, A similar letter has been sent to the Colonial Office. I am, &c. (Signed) EVAN MACGREGOR, Inclosure 1 in No. 6. Public No. 120. An Act to prevent the Extermination of Fur-bearing Animals in Alaska. BE it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled that it shall be unlawful to kill any fur-seal upon the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, or in the waters adjacent thereto, except during the months of June, July, September, and October in each year, and it shall be unlawful to kill such seals at any time by the use of fire-arms, or use other means tending to drive the seals away from said islands. Provided that the natives of said islands shall have the privilege of killing such young seals as may be necessary for their own food and clothing during other months, and also such old seals as may be required for their own clothing and for the manufacture of boats for their own use, which killing shall be limited and controlled by such Regulations as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Section 2. And be it further enacted, that it shall be unlawful to kill any female seal, or any seal less than one \ear old at any season of the year except as above provided ; and it shall also be unlawful to kill any seal in the waters adjacent to the said islands, or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain ; and any person who shall violate either of the provisions of this or the first section of this Act shall be punished on conviction thereof for each offence by a fine of not less than 200 dollars, nor more than 1,000 dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding six months, or by such fine and imprisonment both at the discretion of the Court having jurisdiction, by taking cognizance of the offence; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, and furniture, whose crew shall be found engaged in the violation of any of the provisions of this Act, shall be forfeited to the United States. Sec. 3. And be it further enacted, that for the period of twenty years from and after the passage of this Act the number of fur-seals which may be killed for their skins upon the Island of St. Paul is hereby limited and restricted to 75,000 per annum; and the number of fur-seals which may be killed for their skins upon the Island of St. George is hereby limited and restricted to 25,000 per annum. Provided that the Secretary of the Treasury may restrict and limit the right of killing if it shall become necessary for the preservation of such seals, with such proportionate reduction of the rents reserved to the Government as shall be right and proper, and if any person shall knowingly violate either of the provisions of this section, he shall, upon due conviction thereof, be punished in the same way as provided herein for a violation of the provisions of the first and second sections of this Act. Sec. 4. And be it further enacted, that immediately upon the passage of this Act the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease, for the rental" mentioned in section 6 of this Act, to proper and responsible parties, to the best advantage of the United States, having due regard to the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants, the parties heretofore engaged in trade, and the protection of the seal fisheries, for a term of twenty * See Inclosure 1 in No. 1, and Inclosure 2 in No. 3. 93 :years from the 1st day of May, 1870, the-right to-engage in the businestr-of taking fur* seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, and to send a vessel or vessels- to said islands for the skins of such seals, gjving to the lessee or lessees of said islands a>lease, duly executed, in duplicate,, not transferable, and taking from the lessee or lessees of said- islands a bond, with* sufficient sureties, in a sum not less than 500,000 dollars, conditioned for the faithful observance of all the laws and requirements of Congress, and of the Regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury touching the subject-matter of taking fur- seals and disposing of the same, and for. the payment of all taxes and dues accruing to the United States connected therewith; and in making said lease the Secretary of the- Treasury shall have due regard to the preservation of the seal-fur trade of said islands, and the comfort, maintenance, and education of the natives thereof. The said lessees shall furnish to the several masters of vessels employed by them certified copies of the- Jease held by them respectively, which shall be presented to the Government Revenue- officer for the time being who may be in charge at the said islands as the authority of the party for landing and taking skins. Sec. 5. And be it further enacted,, that at the expiration of said term of twenty years,. or on surrender or forfeiture of any lease, other leases may be made in manner aforesaid for other terms of twenty years; but no person other than American citizens shall be permitted by lease or otherwise to occupy said islands or either of them, for the pqrpose of taking the skins of fur-seals therefrom, nor shall any foreign vessel be engaged in taking such skins, and the Secretary of the Treasury shall vacate and declare aqy lease- forfeited i£- the same be held or operated for the use, benefit, or advantage, directly or indirectly, of any person or persons other than American citizens. Every lease- shall" contain a covenant on the part of the lessee that he will not keep, sell, furnish, give, or dispose of any distilled spirits or spirituous liquors on either of the said'islands to any of the natives thereof, such person not being a physician and furnishing t-he same for use as medicine: and any person who shall kill any fur-seal on either of the said islands, or in- the waters adjacent thereto, without authority of the lessees thereof, and any person who shall molest, disturb, or interfere with said lessees, or either of them, or their agents or employe's, in the lawful prosecution of their business, under the provisions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour, and shall for each offence, on conviction thereof, be> punished in the same way and by like, penalties as prescribed in the 2nd- section of this Act; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, appurtenances, and cargo, whose crews shall be found engaged in any violation of either of the provisions of this section, shall be forfeited to the United States; and if any person or Company, under any lease herein, authorized, shall knowingly kill, or permit to be killed, any number of seals exceeding the number for- each island in this- Act prescribed, such- person or Company shall, in addition to the penalties and forfeitures aforesaid, also forfeit the whole number of the skins of seals killed in that year, or, in case the same have been disposed of, then said parties or Company shall forfeit the value of the same; and it shall be the duty of any Revenue officer, officially acting as such on either of said islands, to seize and destroy any distilled spirits or spirituous liquors found thereon, provided that such officer- shall make detailed report of his doing so to the Collector of the port. Sec. 6. And belt further enacted,, that the annual rental to be reserved by said lease shall not be less than- 50,000 dollars per annum, to be secured by deposit of United. States'" bonds to that amount, and in addition thereto a revenue tax as duty of 2 dollars is hereby laid upon each fur-seal skin taken and shipped from said islands during the continuance of- such lease to be paid into the^ Treasury of the United States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby empowered and authorized to make all needful Rules and Regulations for the collection and payment of the same, for the comfort, maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of said islands, and also for carrying into full effect all the provisions of this Act. Provided, further, that the Secretary of the Treasury may terminate- any lease given to any person, Company, or Corporation on full and satisfactory proof of the violation of any of the provisions of this Act, or the Rules and Regulations established by him. Provided, further, that the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to deliver to the owners the fur-seal skins now stored on the islands, on the payment of 1 dollar for each of said skins taken and shipped away by said owners. Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, that the provisions of the 7th and 8th sections of "An Act to extend the Laws of the United States relating to Customs, Commerce, and Navigation over the Territory ceded to the United States by Russia, to establish a Collection District thereon, and for other purposes," approved 27th July, 1868, shall be deemed to apply to this Act, and all prosecutions for offences committed against the provisions of this Act, and all other proceedings had because of the violitions of the provisions of this Act, and which are authorized by said Act above mentioned, shall be in' 14 accordance with the provisions thereof, and all Acts and parts of Acts inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby repealed. Sec. 8. And be it further enacted, that the Congress may at any time hereafter alter, amend, or repeal this Act. Approved 1st July, 1870. Inclosure 2 in No. 6. Mr. Boutwell to Mr. Phelps, April 19, 18S2. [See Inclosure'6 in No. 3.] Inclosure 3 in No. 6. Lease of the United States to the Alaska Commercial Company to take Fur Seals in the Territory of Alaska. THIS indenture, in duplicate, made this 3rd day of August, a.d. 1870, by and between William A. Richardson, Acting Secretary of the Treasury, in pursuance of an Act of Congress, approved the 1st July, 1870, entitled "An Act to prevent the Extermination of Fur-bearing Animals in Alaska," and the Alaska Commercial Company, a Corporation duly established under the laws of the State of California, acting by John F. Miller, its 'President and Agent, in accordance with a Resolution of said Corporation duly adopted at a meeting of its Board of Trustees, held the 31st January, 1870, Witnesseth:— That the said Secretary hereby leases to the said Alaska Commercial Company,-without .power of transfer, for the term of twenty years from the 1st day of May, 1870, the right to engage in the business of taking fur-seals on the Islands of St. George and St. Paul, within the Territory of Alaska, and to send a vessel or vessels to said islands for the skins of such seals. And the said Alaska Commercial Company, in consideration of their right under this lease, hereby covenant and agree to pay for each year during said term, and in proportion during any part thereof, the sum of 55,000 dollars into the Treasury of the United States, in accordance with the Regulations of the Secretary, to be made •for this purpose under said Act, which payment shall be secured by deposit of United States' bonds to that amount, and also covenant and agree to pay annually into the 'Treasury of the United States, under said Rules and Regulations, a revenue tax or duty of 2 dollars upon each fur-seal skin taken and shipped by them, in accordance with the provisions of the Act aforesaid, and also the sum of 62^ cents for each fur-seal skin taken and shipped, and 55 cents per gallon for each gallon of oil obtained from said seals for sale on said islands.or elsewhere, and sold by said Company; and also covenant and agree, in accordance with said Rules and Regulations, to furnish free of charge the. inhabitants of the Islands of St. Paul and St. George annually during said term 25,000 dried salmon, 60 cords fire-wood, a sufficient quantity of salt and a sufficient number of barrels for preserving the necessary supply of meat. And the said lessees also hereby covenant and agree during the term aforesaid to maintain a school on each island, in accordance with said Rules and Regulations, and suitable for the education of the natives of said islands, for a period of not less than eight months in each year. And the said lessees further covenant and agree not to kill upon said Island of St, Paul more than 75,000 fur-seals, and upon the Island of St. George not more than •_'5,000 fur-seals, per annum; not to kill any fur-seal upon the islands aforesaid in any other month except the months of June, July, September, and October of each year; not to kill such seals at any time by the use of fire-arms or other means tending to drive the seals from said islands; not to kill any female seal or any seal less than one year old; not to kill any seal in the waters adjacent to said islands, or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain. And the said lessees further covenant and agree to abide by any restriction or limitation upon the rights to kill seals under this lease that the Act prescribes, or that the Secretary of the Treasury shall judge necessary for the preservation of such seals. i$I And the said lessees hereby'.a£ree that they will not in any wiay sell, transfer, or assign this lease, and that any transfer, sale, or assignment of the same shall be void or of no effect. And the said lessees further covenant and agree to furnish to the several masters of the vessels employed by them certified copies of this lease to be presented to the Government Revenue officers for the time being in charge of said islands, as the authority of said lessees for the landing and taking said skins. And the said lessees further covenant and agree that they or their agents shall not keep, sell, furnish, give, or dispose of any distilled spirits or spirituous liquors on either of the said islands to any of the natives thereof, such person not being a physician furnishing the same for use as medicine. And the said lessees further covenant and agree that this lease is accepted subject to all needful Rules and Regulations which shall at anytime or times hereafter be made by the Secretary of the Treasury for the collection and payment of the rentals herein agreed to be paid by said lessees, for the comfort, maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of said islands, and for carrying into effect all the provisions of the Act aforesaid, and will abide by and conform to said Rules and Regulations. And the said lessees, accepting this lease with a full knowledge of the provisions, of the aforesaid Act of Congress, further covenant and agree that they will fulfil all the provisions, requirements, and limitations of said Act, whether herein specifically, set out or not. In witness whereof, the parties aforesaid have hereunto set their hands and seals the day and year above written. WILLIAM A. RICHARDSON, Acting Secretary to the Treasury. JNO. F. MILLER, President Alaska Commercial Company. Executed in presence of— (Signed) J. H. Saville. I certify the foregoing printed copy of the lease of the United States to the Alaska. Commercial Company of the right to take fur-seals in the Territory of Alaska has been compared with the original on file in this Department, and is a true copy thereof. (Signed) J. H. SAVILLE, Washington, September 3, 1870. Chief Clerk, Treasury Department. office. State of California, City and County of San Francisco, Collector's Office, Custom-house, December 23, 1885. I hereby certify the foregoing to be correct copies of original documents on file at this State of California, City and County of San Francisco. John T. Fogarty, being duly sworn, deposes and says that the foregoing are true and correct copies of original documents on file in the office of the Collector of Customs of the port of San Francisco, that he has compared the foregoing with said originals, and knows them to be correct copies to his own knowledge. (Signed) JOHN T. FOGARTY. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23rd day of December, 1885. (Signed) John E. Hamill, Notary Public. No. 7. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 16.) Sir, Downing Street, October 16, 1886. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 25th ultimo, respecting the seizure- of certain Canadian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea, I am directed bv t 16 Mr. Secretary Stanhope to transmit to you, to be laid before the Earl of Iddesteigh, copies of three despatches from the Officer administering the Government of Canada on the subject. Mr. Stanhope would be glad to be informed whether Lord Iddesleigh has -directed any action to be taken on the letter above referred to. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure 1 in No. 7, Administrator Lord A. E. Russell to Mr. Stanhope. Sir, Halifax, Nova Scotia, September 27, 1886. I HAVE the honour -to forward herewith, for transmission to the Foreign Office, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting depositions from some of the officers and men of the Canadian schooners " Onward," "Thornton," and ** Carolina," relative to the seizure of those vessels in Behring's Sea by the United States" Revenue cutter "Corwin," and their subsequent detention at theport of Ounalaska, in the Territory of Alaska. 2. You will observe from the accompanying papers that it appears that the schooners mentioned are Canadian vessels, fitted out in Victoria, British Columbia, for the capture of seals in the waters of the Northern Pacific Ocean adjacent to Vancouver Island, Queen Charlotte Islands, and Alaska, and that at. the time of their seizure by the " Corwin " on the 1st August last they were taking seals in the open sea at a distance of more than 60 miles from land. 3. My Minister of Marine and Fisheries has taken steps to get further depositions from the owners, masters, and crews of the above-mentioned vessels in order that a claim may be made upon the United States' Government for damages for the unwarranted seizure of British vessels on the high sea. 4. I have communicated a copy of this Order in Council, with the .accompanying papers, -to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. I have, &c. Inclosure 2 in No. 7. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada^ approved by his Excellency the Administrator of the Government in Council, on the 3rd September, 1886. ON a Report dated the 18th September, 1886, from the Minister of Marine-and Fisheries, submitting the accompanying papers relative to the seizure of the Canadian schooners " Onward," " Thornton," and " Carolina," in Behring's Sea, by the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin," and their subsequent detention at the port of Ounalaska, in the Territory of Alaska— L Copy of a letter from James Ogilvie, master of the Canadian seaiing schooner "Carolina;'' 2. Copy of a letter from Daniel Munroe, master of the Canadian sealing schooner "Onward;" 3. Deposition of John Dallas, seaman on board the "Thornton;" of Thomas McLardy, cook on board the "Carolina;" of Edward Shields, seaman on board the "Carolina;" and of William Munsie, owner of the " Carolina;" all of the Province of British Columbia: The Minister observes that from these papers it appears that the schooners mentioned are Canadian vessels fitted out in Victoria, British Columbia, for the capture of seals in the waters .of the Northern Pacific Ocean, adjacent to Vancouver Island, Queen Charlotte's Islands, and Alaska; that at the time of their seizure by the "Corwin" they were taking seals in the open sea out of sight of land, the " Carolina" in latitude 30° 50' north, longitude 168° 53' west; the "Onward" in latitude 54° 52' north, longitude 167°-55' west; and the "Thornton" in about the same latitude and longitude; and all of them at a distance of more than 60 miles from' the nearest land; that they were taken possession of by the United States' cutter on the 1st August, 1886, and towed to the port 17 of Ounalaska, where they are still detained. The crews of the "Thornton" and t: Carolina," with the exception of the captain and one man on each vessel detained at Ounalaska, were sent by the steamer " St. Paul " to San Francisco, California, and then turned adrift, while the crew of the " Onward" was kept at Ounalaska. At the time of their seizure the " Thornton" had 404 seal-skins on board, the I Onward 900, and the " Carolina " 686, and these are detained and kept at Ounalaska along with the schooners by the United States' authorities. The Minister states that he has taken steps to get further depositions from the owners, masters, and crews of the vessels above mentioned, in order that a claim may be made upon the United States' Government for damages for this unwarranted seizure of British vessels in the open sea. The Committee recommend that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute, if approved, together with copies of the papers herein mentioned, to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the Foreign Office, and also copies to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, All of which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 7. Mr. Ogilvie to Mr. Munsie, August 6, 1886. [See Inclosure 5 in No. 3.] Inclosure 4 in No. 7. Mr. D. Munroe to Mr. C. Spring. Schooner " Onward," at Port Ilioluk, Ounalaska, Dear Sir, August 7, 1886, ON the 2nd, while the " Onward " was in latitude 54° 52' north, longitude 167° 55' west, and about 70 miles from the nearest land, the United States' Revenue cutter I Corwin," having the schooners "Thornton " and " Carolina" in tow, boarded us, and sent a crew on board and towed us in here, where we are lying at present with sails bent and seals on board, and a watchman in charge, but cannot find out what they intend to do with us, so I cannot say any more about it at present. I met the " Favourite" on the 28th. Captain M'Lean was on board of us; we gave him 508 skins, and they had 1,290 they took themselves, making them about 1,800 total, and as we were in sight of each other until the night of the 1st instant he must have made a good catch, for we have 400 skins on board at present that we took in four days, and I am positive his crowd could take twice that number, as we have not got the best of sealers, I believe all the schooners did well, and I trust they will get away all right. There is no cutter out at present, as there is only two of them up here—one of them up in the Arctic, and the other that brought us here is still watching us here. We may find out to-day how they are going to dispose of us, but I am in hopes they made false steps, and that they can do nothing more than spoil the season. They took the schooner " San Diego " in here about a month ago, and took the skins out of her and unbent her sails, and put everything ashore, and they are sending the crew to San Francisco to-day in one of the Fur Company's steamers, the | St. Paul." only the crews of the "Thornton" and Later on Have heard nothing more, " Carolina " are going to San Francisco to-day [? by] the steamer | St. Paul,'' except the captain and one man of each, but they took none of our crew. There are rumours afloat that the three schooners are to be laid up here all winter, and that we are going to be taken to Sitka, but no certainty. I wrote you this morning as the boat was leaving the wharf, thinking that she was going away, but she came to anchor in the Roads, and I do not think I finished it. I was afraid of being late. We sent a protest on board the cutter against the action of the authorities in seizing the vessel on the high seas, but I do not know if it will amount to much. There is no Notary Public here [128] D 18 to sign it. I have nothing more to write to you, trusting things will turn out better than we expect. I remain, &c. (Signed) DANL. MUNROE. Inclosure 5 in No. 7. Declarations of John Dallas, William Munsie, Thomas McLardy, and Edward Shields. [See Inclosure 10 in No. 3.] Inclosure 6 in No. 7. Administrator Lord A. E. Russell to Mr. Stanhope, September 27, 1886. [Substance of telegram of September 22. See Inclosure 1 in Ho. 3.] Inclosure 7 in No. 7. Administrator Lord A. E. Russell to Mr. Stanhope. Mv Lord, Halifax, Nova Scotia, September 27, 18S6. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith a copy of an approved Minute of my Privy Council, to which is appended a Report by my Minister of Marine and Fisheries, upon which my telegram of the 22nd instant was founded, relative to the seizures of the Canadian schooners "Thornton," "Onward," and "Carolina" while engaged in the peaceable pursuit of their lawful occupation on the high seas. 2. It will be seen from this Report that the masters and mates of the above.mentioned vessels have been tried before the United States' District Court at Sitka, in Alaska, and sentences of imprisonment, in addition to heavy fines, imposed upon them, while their property has been subjected to forfeiture. 3. My Ministers are of opinion that the action of the United States' authorities with respect to these vessels is indefensible, and that immediate reparation should be demanded from the Government of that country therefor. I have, &c. Inclosure 8 in No. 7. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Administrator of the Government in Council, on the 24th September, 1886. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had before them the annexed Report from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries with reference to the case of the Canadian schooners "Thornton," " Onward," and "Carolina," seized .on the 1st August last by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea. The Committee concur in the said Report, and they advise that the same be carried OUt; All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 9 in No. 7. Report. IN reference to a Report of Council, under date the 23rd September, referring to the case of the Canadian schooners "Thornton," "Onward," and " Carolina," seized on the 1st August by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea, the Undersigned has the honour to lay before Council the following additional information. 19 It is stated in effect in " The Alaskan," a newspaper published at Sitka, in the Territory of Alaska, and bearing date the 4th September, 1886— 3. That the master and mate of the schooner " Thornton" were brought for trial before Judge Dawson in the United States' District Court at Sitka on the 30th August last. 2. That the evidence given by the officers of the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin" attempts to show that the "Thornton" was seized while in Behring's Sea, about 60 or 70 miles south-south-east of St. George's Island, for the offence of hunting and killing seals within that part of Behring's Sea which was ceded to the United States by Russia in 1867. 3. That the Judge, in his charge to the jury, after quoting the 1st Article of the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867, between Russia and the United States, in which the western boundary of Alaska is defined, goes on to say: "All the waters within the boundary set forth in this Treaty to the western end of the Aleutian Archipelago and chain 'of islands are to be considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska, and all the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing animals must, therefore, attach against any violation of law within-the limits heretofore described. "If, therefore, the jury believe from the evidence that the defendants by themselves, or in conjunction with others, did, on or about the time charged in the information, kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal or animals, on the shores of Alaska, or in the Behring's Sea east of the 193rd degree of west longitude, the jury should find the defendants guilty, and assess their punishment separately at a fine of not less than 200 dollars nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisonment not more than six months, or by both such fine, within the limits herein set forth, and imprisonment." 4. That the jury brought in a verdict of guilty against the prisoners, in accordance with which the master of the "Thornton," Hans Guttounsen, was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days and to pay a fine of 500 dollars, and the mate of the "Thornton," Norman, was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days and to pay a fine of 300 dollars, which terms of imprisonment are presumably now being carried into effect. It also appears, by telegraphic despatch from Nanaimo, British Columbia, dated the 18th September, that the masters and mates of the "Onward" and " Carolina" have since been tried and sentenced to undergo similar penalties to those being inflicted on the master and mate of the "■' Thornton." It will appear from the above information, conjoined with the Report of Council under date the 23rd September, that the United States have determined to lay claim to the sole sovereignty of that part of Behring's Sea lying east of the westerly boundary of Alaska, as defined in the 1st Article of the Treaty made between the United States and Russia in 1867, by which Alaska was ceded to the United States, and which includes a stretch of sea extending in its widest part some 600 or 700 miles easterly from the mainland of Alaska. In pursuance of this claim, they have interfered with the peaceable and lawful occupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas, have taken possession of their ships, have subjected their property to forfeiture, and visited upon their persons the indignity of imprisonment. They appear to have done this in spite of the admitted principles of international law, and in direct opposition to their own contention of what constitutes common waters upon the Atlantic coast. In view of the unwarranted and arbitrary action of the United States' authorities, the Undersigned recommends that a copy of this Report be sent to Her Majesty's Government to the end that immediate reparation be demanded from the Government of the United States, and that in the meantime the facts contained therein be telegraphed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies and to the British Minister at Washington. The whole respectfully submitted. (Signed) GEORGE E. FOSTER, Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Department of Fisheries, Canada, Ottawa, September 21, 1886. [128] D ,20 No.. 8. The Earl of Iddesleigh. to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, October 20, 1886. YOU have received from the Canadian Government a protest against the claim advanced by the United States' authorities in seizing three Canadian schooners which were engaged in the capture of seals in what are alleged to be Alaskan waters. I request that you will lose no time in protesting against these proceedings in the name of Her Majesty's Government; and you will at the same time reserve for consideration hereafter all rights to compensation which may be brought forward. Full instructions in regard to this matter will be sent to you by mail. I am, &c. (Signed) IDDESLEIGH. No. 9. The Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, October 21, 1886. I HAVE to request you to inform me whether the United States' Government have replied to the communication which you were directed to make in my despatch of the 9th ultimo, regarding the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea by a United States' Revenue cutter. If an answer has been received I should be glad to receive a report of the substance by telegraph. I should be glad at the same time to know whether any appeal has been lodged against the decisions of the United States' Courts condemning certain British subjects in connection with this matter. I am, &c. (Signed) IDDESLEIGH. No. 10. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received by telegraph, October 22.) My Lord, Washington, October 21, 1886. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of this day's date, I have the honour .to inform your Lordship that no answer has as yet been returned to the communication which, in obedience to the instructions contained in your Lordship's despatch of the ■9th ultimo, I addressed to the Secretary of State, asking to be furnished with any particulars which the United States' Government may possess relative to the seizures of British vessels in Behring's Sea, and that I have at present no knowledge of any appeal having been made against the decisions of the United States' Courts condemning the parties concerned. The above information -was telegraphed to your Lordship this day. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 11. The Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, October 30, 1886. HER Majesty's Government are still awaiting a Report on the result of the application which you were directed by my despatch of the 9th ultimo to make to the Government of the United States for information in regard to the reported seizure by the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin" of three Canadian schooners while engaged in the pursuit of seals in Behring's Sea. In the meanwhile, further details in regard to these seizures have been sent to 21 this country, and Her Majesty's Government now consider it incumbent on them to bring to the notice of the United States' Government the facts of the case as they have reached them from British sources. It appears that the three schooners, named respectively the " Carolina," the " Onward," and the "Thornton," were fitted out in Victoria, British Columbia, for the capture of seals in the waters of the Northern Pacific Ocean, adjacent to Vancouver's Island, Queen Charlotte Islands, and Alaska. According to the depositions inclosed herewith from some of the officers and men,* these vessels were engaged in the capture of seals in the open sea out of sight of land, when they were taken possession of on or about the 1st August last by the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin," the "Carolina," in latitude 55° 52' north, longitude 16S° 53' west, the " Onward " in latitude 50° 52'north, longitude 167° 55' west, and the "Thornton " in about the same latitude and longitude. They were all at a distance of more than 60 miles from the nearest land at the time of their seizure, and on being captured were towed by the " Corwin " to Ounalaska, where they are still detained. The cre_ws of the " Carolina " and " Thornton," with the exception of the captain and one man on each vessel detained at that port, were, it appears, sent by the steamer " St. Paul" to San Francisco, California, and then turned adrift, while the crew of the | Onward " were kept at Ounalaska. At the time of their seizure the " Carolina" had 686 seal-skins on board, the "Thornton" 404, and the "Onward" 900, and these were detained, and would appear to be still kept at Ounalaska along with the schooners by the United States' authorities. According to information given in the " Alaskan," a newspaper published at Sitka, in the Territory of Alaska, and dated the 4th September, 1886, it is reported :— 1. That the master and mate of the schooner " Thornton " were brought for trial before Judge Dawson in the United States' District Court at Sitka on the 30th August last. 2. That the evidence given by the officers of the United States' Revenue cutter I Corwin " went to show that the | Thornton " was seized while in Behring's Sea, about 60 or 70 miles south-south-east of St. George Island, for the offence of hunting and killing seals within that part of Behring's Sea which (it was alleged by the "Alaskan " newspaper) was ceded to the United States by Russia in 1867. 3. That the Judge in his charge to the jury, after quoting the 1st Article of the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867, between Russia and the United States, in which the western boundary of Alaska is defined, went on to say: " All the waters within the boundary set forth in this Treaty to the western end of the Aleutian Archipelago and chain of islands are to be considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska, and all the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur-bearing animals must therefore attach against any violation of law within the limits heretofore described. If, therefore, the jury believe from the evidence that the defendants, by themselves or in conjunction with others, did, on or about the time charged in the information, kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal or animals, on the shores of Alaska or in the Behring's Sea east of 193° of west longitude, the jury should find the defendants guilty, and assess their punishment separately, at a fine of not less than 200 dollars nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisonment not more than six months, or by both such fine, within the limits herein set forth, and imprisonment." 4. That the jury brought in a verdict of guilty against the prisoners, in accordance with which the master of the "Thornton," Hans Guttounsen, was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days and to pay a fine of 500 dollars, and the mate of the " Thornton,"' Norman, was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days and to pay a fine of 300 dollars, which terms of imprisonment are presumably now being carried into effect. There is also reason to believe that the masters and mates of the "Onward" and. | Carolina " have since been tried, and sentenced to undergo penalties similar to those now- being inflicted on the master and mate of the " Thornton." You will observe, from the facts given above, that the authorities of the United States appear to lay claim to the sole sovereignty of that part of Behring's Sea lying east of the westerly boundary of Alaska, as defined in the 1st Article of the Treaty concluded between the United States and Russia in 1867, by which Alaska was ceded to the United States, and * i. Copy of a letter from Daniel Munroe, master of the Canadian sealing schooner " Onward." 2. Copy of a letter from James Ogilvie, master of the Canadian sealing schooner " Carolina." 3. Deposition of John Dallas, seaman on board the " Thornton ; " of Thomas McLardy, cook on board the " Carolina ;" of Kdward Shields, seaman on board the " Carolina;" and of Wm. Munsie, owner of the " Carolina ; " all of the Province of British Columbia. 22 which includes a stretch of sea extending in its widest part some 600 or 700 miles easterly from the mainland of Alaska. In support of this claim, those authorities are alleged to have interfered with the peaceable and lawful occupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas, to have taken possession of their ships, to haVe subjected their property to forfeiture, and to have visited upon their persons the indignity of imprisonment. Such proceedings, if correctly reported, would appear to have been in violation of the admitted principles of international law. I request that you will, on the receipt of this despatch, seek an interview with Mr. Bayard and make him acquainted with the nature of the information with which Her Majesty's Government have been furnished respecting this matter, and state to him that they do not doubt that, if on inquiry it should prove to be correct, the Government of the United States will, with their well-known sense of justice, at once admit the illegality of the proceedings resorted to against the British vessels and the British subjects above mentioned, and will cause reasonable reparation to be made for the wrongs to which they have been subjected, and for the losses which they have sustained. Should Mr. Bayard desire it, you are authorized to leave with him a copy of this despatch. I am, &c. (Signed) IDDESLEIGH. No. 12. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received November I.) My Lord, Washington, October 21,18S6. UPON the receipt of your Lordship's despatch of the 9th ultimo I immediately addressed a note to the Secretary of State, in accordance with the instructions therein contained, and copy of which is herewith inclosed, requesting to be furnished with any particulars which the United States' Government may possess relative to the seizure of certain British Columbian seal schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer "Corwin," but to which I have received no reply. Upon the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of yesterday's date I addressed the note copy of which is likewise inclosed, protesting, in the name of Her Majesty's Government, against the said seizures, and reserving rights to compensation. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No. 12. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, September 27, 1886. I HAVE the honour to inform you that Her Majesty's Government have received a telegram from the Commander-in-chief of Her Majesty's naval forces on the Pacific Station respecting the alleged seizure of three British Columbian seal schooners by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin;" and I am, in consequence, instructed to request to be furnished with any particulars which the United States' Government may possess relative to this occurrence. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 2 in No. 12. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, October 21, 1S86. WITH reference to my note of the 27th ultimo, requesting to be furnished with any particulars which the United States' Government may possess relative to the seizure in the North Pacific waters of three British Columbian seal schooners by the 23 United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin," and to which I am without reply, I have the honour to inform you that I am now instructed by the Earl of Iddesleigh, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affains, to protest, in the name of Her Majesty's Government, against such seizure, and to reserve all rights to compensation. (Signed) I have, &c. L. S. SACKVILLE W£S& No. 13. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—Received November 5 ) (Extract.) Admiralty, November 4, 18S6. REFERRING to my letter of the 20th September last and to previous correspondence, I am commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit herewith, for the perusal of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, cuttings from a newspaper called' the " Daily British Colonist," at Victoria, respecting the seizure of British Columbian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea. Inclosure in No. 13. Extract from the "Daily British Colonist," Victoria, of October", 1886. (From the | Brooklyn Eagle.") The Alaska Seizures.—The recent seizure of vessels in Behring's Sea by the United States' Revenue steamer "Corwin," for the alleged illegal capture of seals in the waters of the United States, has attracted a surprisingly small amount of attention, in this quarter at least. This is probably due to the fact that the Cabinet has not had a meeting for some time, and that but "one Cabinet Minister remained in Washington, so that there was a lack of information on the subject, which was unfavourable to its discussion. Now. however, we have something like an official Report of what has taken place from the Captain of the "Corwin," and the matter is ripe for the attention of the press of the United States. No one who gives the subject his notice can fail to recognize the fact that it is one of the most important questions this Government was ever called upon to discuss, and that it may involve consequences of the highest moment. The Captain of the " Corwin," it appears, was acting under positive instructions received at San Francisco, commanding him to seize and deliver to the United states District Court of Alaska, for condemnation and seizure, all vessels found engaged in the capture of seals within Alaskan waters, which were defined to include all of Behrings Sea east of the line from Behring's Strait to a point west of the most western of the Aleutian Islands. Under this interpretation a vessel might be more than 500 miles from the mainland of America, and still a trespasser in Alaskan waters, and therefore liable to seizure. The complaints which led to the issuing of these instructions came from the Alaska Fur Seal Company, who lease the seal fisheries from the Government for the payment of 317,000 dollars annually. ... The vessels captured were six in number, three of them being described as British, one American from San Francisco, but the nationality of the other two is not given. It is. not pretended that any of them was within a marine league of the shore ; infact, the only vessel whose place of capture is specifically stated in the despatch is the British schooner I Thornton," which, the Captain of the " Corwin " says, was captured about 70 miles south- south-east of St. George. This would bring her 150 miles &©m the chain of the Aleutian Islands, and 300 from the nearest point of the mainland. The captured schooners were taken to Ounalaska, where they were libelled for condemnation, and their crews were conveyed to Sitka, where the masters and mates, in addition to the loss of their vessels, were tried before Judge Dawson, and fined and imprisoned. In the case of the " Thornton," the captain was flned 5C0 dollars. Judge Dawson, in passing sentence, was very severe on the prisoners, .and likened their offence to piracy, telling them that they had no more right to go into the waters of another nation to interfere with its indostries than they had to go upon another man's land and appropriate bis crops. Judge Dawson, although only a District Judge, considers that 4u> jurisdiction 24 extends over the whole of the waters of Alaska, comprising about 1,000,000 square miles of what would elsewhere be regarded as the high seas, so that he may safely be regarded as the greatest maritime Judge extant. If it should be reported some days in the papers that a Gloucester^ fishermen had been captured by a Canadian cruizer 300 miles off the coast of Nova Scotia, and that her master and mate, in addition to the loss of their vessel, had been heavily fined, and were then languishing in a Canadian prison, there would probably be some indignation in New England. Yet that, as regards the maritime aspect of the case, is substantially what the Alaskan seizures amount to. It is maintained, however, that the circumstances of these cases are modified by the fact that Russia claimed the whole Behring's Sea as part of her territory, and that the waters claimed by this Government were ceded as part of Alaska. Judge Dawson is reported to have said on this point that Russia had claimed and exercised jurisdiction over all that portion of Behring's Sea embraced in the boundary-line set forth, in the Treaty, and that claim had been tacitly recognized and acquiesced in by the other Maritime Powers of the world for a long series of years prior to the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867. He held that the jurisdiction had been transferred, and that the United States had acquired absolute control and dominion over the area described in the Treaty, and that British vessels, manned by British subjects, had no right to navigate the waters for the purpose of killing fur-bearing seals. If this is good law, that is the end of the matter; but is it good law? Unless we are greatly in error, there are copies of despatches on the files of the State Department, written prior to 1867, in which the Russian claim is distinctly repudiated and denied. Circumstances may have changed since then as to our attitude towards the subject, but the principle has not. And we doubt greatly whether the United States would ever have admitted such a claim if made by another nation. What would be said, for instance, if the British undertook to prevent an American whaler from entering Hudson Bay or traversing the western half of that arm of the Atlantic Ocean which leads to it ? Maritime law and international law are the same whether on the Atlantic or the Pacific, and there is certainly something grotesque in the sight of hundreds of American fishermen hovering on the Canadian Atlantic coast just beyond the 3-mile limit, and claiming to enter all bays more than 3 miles wide at the mouth and fish, while, on the Pacific, Canadian vessels are captured 300 miles from the mainland, and the claim is made that a bay more than 1,000 miles wide at the mouth shall be a closed sea to them. There is another aspect to the case, not international but national. One of the vessels captured was an American schooner from San Francisco. All other American vessels, except those of the Alaska Seal Fur Company, are therefore excluded from these waters, which are claimed as belonging to Alaska. Is there any warrant for this in the Constitution of the United States? It has been the evil policy of the nation to give up the whole Territory of Alaska to one gigantic monopoly, to discourage settlement and all legitimate enterprises not connected with the fur trade. Is this policy to be continued ? It surely was not for this purpose that the territory was bought, but that its resources might be developed, and such parts of it as are suitable for settlement opened to industrious workers. But for nineteen years Alaska has been nothing but the reserve of a great Corporation, which is even now scheming to obtain a renewal of its franchises there. The matter is one of the greatest interest and importance to the American people, who are not desirous of establishing monopolies in Alaska or elsewhere, but wish to see all their territory opened up and made available for the use of all our citizens. No. 14. Messrs. Lampson and Co. to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received November 13.) My Lord, 64, Queen Street, London, November 12, 1886. • WE understand a question of international law has arisen between the Government of the United States on the one hand and the Governments of Great Britain and of the Dominion of Canada on the other hand, respecting the seizure by the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin" of certain Dominion fishing-vessels engaged in capturing fur- seals in the waters of Alaska. As the future existence of the fur-seal skin trade, in which we have for years past been engaged, largely depends upon the settlement of this question, we beg to submit, for vour consideration, the following facts :— 25 Situated in the waters of Alaska, latitude 57° north, longitude 170° west, is the Pribylov group of islands, belonging to the United States. These islands, which are occupied every year from May to October by a large number of fur-seals for the purpose of breeding, have been leased to an American Company, under stringent conditions, which restrict them from killing more than 100,000 young males per annum, and strictly prohibit them from killing any female seals whatever. The fur-seal being a polygamous animal, the annual increase is not affected by the killing of this limited number of young males ; and it has been found that the wise nursing by these means of this very important fishery has not only resulted in the preservation of the seals during the past sixteen years, but has also given an ample supply of skins for purposes of trade. During the last few seasons, however, fishing-vessels have been fitted out from ports in British Columbia and the United States, and have been engaged in the wholesale slaughter of female seals, which, during the breeding season, swarm in the waters round the islands for a considerable distance out to sea. Last summer several of the Dominion vessels were seized by the United States' cutter, and it is stated that a case is being prepared by the Dominion Government, for presentation to the United States' Government, disputing the legality of the said captures. Should Great Britain deny the right of the United States' Government to protect the fishery in an effectual manner, there can be no doubt that the Alaska fur-seals, which furnish by far the most important part of the world's supply of seal-skins, will be exterminated in a very few years, just as in the South Atlantic the Shetland and Georgia fur-seals, which used to furnish even finer pelts than the Alaskas, have already been. It is evident, therefore, that the benefit derived by the Dominion fishing-vessels from the slaughter of these female seals will be short-lived. We would next point out that the 100,000 skins, the annual produce of the islands (worth 3.>0,000/. at present prices), have been shipped to us for sale and manufacture in London for sixteen years past, thus affording in this city employment for a large amount of capital and means of subsistence to some 10,000 people, many of whom are skilled workmen earning wages up to 3Z. per week. We need, therefore, hardly suggest that it would be a shortsighted and disastrous policy to allow such an industry to be destroyed, especially at a time when so much distress is already prevalent among the working classes. We therefore earnestly trust the British Government will, after verifying the above facts, see its way to give its friendly support to the United States in the exercise of their right to protect and preserve an article of commerce equally affecting the interests of both countries. We have telegraphed to New York for the "Monograph of the Seal Islands,'' by Professor Elliott, which fully describes the seal life upon the islands. When we have received the book we shall have the pleasure of handing it to your Lordship. We are, &c. (Signed) C. M. LAMPSON and Co. No. 15. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received November 16.) Sir, Downing Street, November 16, 1886. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Stanhope to transmit to you, to be laid before the Earl of Iddesleigh, a telegram which has been received from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the Alaska seizures; and I am to request to be informed of the answer which should be returned to Lord Lansdowne's inquiry. I am, &c (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. [1281 E 26 Inclosure in No. 15. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Mr. Stanhope. (Telegraphic.) Ottawa, November 14, 1886. ALASKA seizures. Has any answer been received to representations ? Papers will be sent you proving that the case is one of great hardship, and that a total disregard of international rights has been shown by the action of the United States. We believe the masters of the vessels are still in prison. No, 16. The Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, November 18, 1886. I HAVE to inform you that inquiry has been made by the Government of Canada as to what reply has been received from the Government of the United States to the representations which, as reported in your telegram of the 21st October, you had made to them in regard to the seizure of three schooners from British Columbia by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin " in Behring's Sea. Lord Lansdowne reports that it is believed that the captains of these vessels are still in prison, and that documents will be sent to this eountry proving that the case is one of great hardship, and that a total disregard of international rights has been shown in the action of the authorities of the United States. I have, in consequence, sent you a telegram this day requesting you to report how this case now stands. I am, &c. (Signed) IDDESLEIGH. - No. 17. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received by telegraph, November 19.) My Lord, Washington, November 19, 1886. UPON the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of yesterday's date I sought an interview with the Secretary of State, and asked him whether he had received the official Report of the proceedings of the Court at Sitka (Alaska) against the British vessels seized in Behring's Sea. Mr. Bayard replied in the negative, and said that he had been urging the Attorney-General in the matter since he last saw me. It would be, he continued, a complicated question of jurisdiction, for he had been told that many of the seal-skins found on board the British vessels were skins of seals which had, not been shot, but clubbed, which proved that a landing had been effected. He said that he would reply to your Lordship's despatch which I had communicated to him as soon as possible. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 18. Foreign Office to Messrs. Lampson and Co. Gentlemen, Foreign Office, November 19, 1886. I AM directed by the Earl of Iddesleigh to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 12th instant, relative to the seizure of certain British-owned seal-fishing vessels by the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin," in the waters of Alaska; and I am to inform you, in reply, that the question is now under the consideration of Her Majesty's Government. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 19. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received November 26.) My Lord, Washington, November 14, 1886. WITH reference to my despatch of the 21st ultimo, 1 have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I have received from the Secretary of State, explaining and apologizing for the delay which has occurred in replying to my note of the 21st September last, asking for information respecting the seizure by the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin,'' in the Behring's Sea, of British vessels, and — — - — — — — ? — — ,—j ,, — jstIwa noting the protest on the part of Her Majesty's Government against such seizures contained in my note of the 21st ultimo, copy of which was inclosed in my above* mentioned despatch. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 19. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, November 12, 1886. THE delay in my reply to your letters of the 27th September and 21st October, asking for the information in my possession concerning the seizure by the United States' Revenue cutter 1 Corwin," in the Behring's Sea, of British vessels for an alleged violation of the laws of the United States'in relation to the Alaska seal fisheries, has been caused by my waiting to receive from the Treasury Department the information you desired. I tender this fact in apology for the delay and as the reason for my silence; and, repeating what I said verbally to you in our conversation this morning, I am still awaiting full and authentic Reports of the judicial trial and Judgment in the cases of the seizures referred to. My application to my colleague the Attorney-General to procure an authentic Report of these proceedings was promptly made, and the delay in furnishing the Report doubtless has arisen from the remoteness of the place of trial. As soon as I am enabled, I will convey to you the facts as ascertained in the trial, and the rulings of law as applied by the Court. I take leave also to acknowledge your communication of the 21st October, informing me that you had been instructed by the Earl of Iddesleigh, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to protest against the seizure of the vessels above referred to, and to reserve all rights of compensation. AH of which shall receive respectful consideration. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 20. The Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. West. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, December 6, 1886. CANADIAN Government inquire whether vessels equipping in British Columbia for Behring's Sea fisheries are exposed to seizure. They seek assurance that no seizures of British vessels will be made beyond territorial waters of Alaska pending settlement of question. No. 21. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received December 24.) (Extract.) Washington, December 10, 1886. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the (3th instant, and to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I addressed to the Secretary of State in the sense of it. - [12S] E 2 28 Inclosure in No. 21. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, December 7, 1886. REFERRING to your note of the 12th ultimo on the subject of the seizure of British vessels in the Behring's Sea, and promising to convey to me as soon as possible the facts as ascertained in the trial.and the rulings of law as applied by the Court, I have the honour to state that vessels are now as usual equipping in British Columbia for fishing in that sea. The Canadian Government, therefore, in the absence of information, are desirous of ascertaining whether such vessels fishing in the open seas and beyond the territorial waters of Alaska would be exposed to seizure, and Her Majesty's Government at the same time would be glad if some assurance could be given that, pending the settlement of the question, no such seizures of British vessels will be made in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 22. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received January 5.) Sii, Downing Street, January 4, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure by the United States' Revenue-steamer " Corwin" of certain Canadian schooners engaged in the seal fishery in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Mr. Secretary Stanhope to transmit to you, for such further action in the matter as the Earl of Iddesleigh may think proper, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, inclosing copy of an approved Report of his Privy Council, explaining the views of the Dominion Government in the matter. Mr. Stanhope would be glad to receive a copy of any communication which Lord Iddesleigh may address to the United States' Government in consequence of this further representation from the Government of Canada on the subject. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 22. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Mr. Stanhope. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, November 27, 1886. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith copy of an approved Report of my Privy Council dealing with the recent seizure of the Canadian schooners " Caroline," I Onward," and " Thornton" by the United States' Revenue steamer 1 Corwin " while fishing for seals in Behring's Sea. The statements contained in the Report are sufficient to establish that the claim now put forward on the part of the United States to the sole right of taking fur- hearing animals within the limits laid down in the 1st Article of the Treaty of 1867 is inconsistent with the rights secured to Great Britain under the Convention of 1825, and is in substance the same as that which, when advanced by the Russian Government on different occasions prior to the cession of Alaska by Russia to the United States, was either strenuously resisted or treated with ridicule and contempt by the Government of the latter Power. It is impossible to believe that, when by the Convention of 1825 it was agreed that the subjects of Great Britain, as one of the Contracting Parties, should not be "troubled or molested in any part of the ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean, either in navigating the same or in fishing therein," any reservation was intended with regard to that part of the Pacific Ocean known as Behring's Sea. The whole course of the negotiations by which this Convention and that between Russia and the United States of the same year were, preceded—negotiations which, as pointed out in the Rep6rt;> arose out of conflicting claims to these very waters—points to the contrary conclusion. It would, indeed, be difficult to condemn the present pretensions of the 29 United States' authorities in language more convincing or emphatic than that which, while those negotiations were in progress, was used by Mr. Middleton, then Russian Minister at St. Petersburgh, in nis Memorandum dated the 13th December, 1823. (Vide American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. v, No. 384.) It is laid down in that Memorandum that " the existence of territorial rights to the distance of 100 miles from the coasts upon two opposite continents, and the prohibition of approaching to the same distance from these coasts or from those of all the intervening islands, are innovations in the law of nations and measures unexampled. It must thus be imagined that this prohibition, hearing the pains of confiscation, applies to a long line of coasts with the intermediate islands, situate in vast seas where the navigation is subject to innumerable and unknown difficulties, and where the chief employment, which is the whale fishery, cannot be compatible with a regulated and well-determined course." Mr. Middleton added that: I Universal usage, which has obtained the force of law, has established for all the coasts an accessory limit of a moderate distance, which is sufficient for the security of the country and for the commerce of its inhabitants, but which lays no restraint upon the universal rights of nations, nor upon the freedom of commerce and navigation." Under the Treaty of 1867 Russia ceded to the United States "all the rights, franchises, and privileges " then belonging to her in the territory or dominion included within the limits described (vide Article VI), but could not cede a right which, in the express terms of the Treaty of 1825, was recognized as belonging to the subjects of the British Crown as well as to those of Russia. This is, as far as I have been able to ascertain, the first occasion upon which claims of the kind now advanced have been enforced. Sealing-vessels from British Columbia have for some years past frequented the waters of Behring's Sea without molestation, and a. letter, of which I inclose a copy, addressed by Mr. William Munsie, of Victoria, British Columbia, to my Minister of Marine and Fisheries, shows how serious will be the effect of this interference upon a well-established and important industry in which many British subjects have a substantial interest. It is, I think, worth while to contrast the claims now urged by the Government of the United States to exclusive control over a part of the Pacific Ocean, the distance between the shores of which is, as was pointed out by Mr. Adams in 1822, not less than 4,000 miles, with the indignant remonstrances recently made by Mr. Bayard against the action of the Canadian authorities in warning United States' fishing-vessels from entering the territorial waters of the Dominion at points where those waters were only a few miles in width and throughout their whole extent in close proximity to Canadian territory. A warning of this kind, when given in respect of the Bay des Chaleurs, which measures about 18 miles at its mouth, was stigmatized by Mr. Bayard in his despatch of the 14th June, 1886, as a " wholly unwarranted pretension of extraterritorial authority," and as an " interference with the unquestionable rights of the American fishermen to pursue their business without molestation at any point not within 3 marine miles of the shore." I would also draw your attention specially to the great hardship occasioned to the owners and crews of the seized vessels by the confiscation of their catch and by the imprisonment of some of the persons on board of them. I understand that, owing to the amount of the fines imposed, which were so heavy that the owners have declined to pay them, the captains and mates of the seized vessels, though originally sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment, a term which has long since expired, are still detained. I may add, in explanation of the concluding passage in Mr. Munsie's letter, that Mr. Ogilvie, the captain of the | Caroline," while waiting at Ounalaska for the trial of his vessel, wandered off into the woods, in which it appears, from Mr. Munsie's statement, that he must have perished. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 22. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on November 27, 1886. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a communication from Mr. E. C. Baker, M.P., Vice-President of the British Columbia Board of Trade, transmitting a letter from Mr. Theodore Lub'be, the managing owner of the 30 British Columbia sealing fleet, asking information as to the United States' claim to the easterly half of Behring's Sea, as American waters, and also a despatch, dated the 26th August last, from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, advising of the seizure of the Canadian schooners "Caroline" and "Thornton," by the United States' Revenue steamer " Corwin," while engaged in sealing in Behring's Sea. Also copy of a letter from Daniel Munroe, master of the j Canadian sealing schooner "Onward," which has been already forwarded by his Excellency the Governor-General to the Colonial Office, and to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. The Sub-Committee of Council, to whom the papers were referred, observe that it appears that the schooners mentioned were Canadian vessels fitted out for the capture of seals in the North Pacific Ocean adjacent to Vancouver Island, Queen Charlotte Island, and Alaska; that they were peaceably pursuing their vocations on the high seas at a distance of some 70 miles from the nearest island, and more than 100 miles from the nearest mainland; that they were taken possession of by the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin" on the 1st August last, and towed to the port of Ounalaska. The crews of the "Thornton" and "Caroline" (with the exception of the captain and one man on each vessel, who were detained at Ounalaska), were sent by steamer to San Francisco, and there turned adrift, while the men of the " Onward " were kept at Ounalaska. The schooners and the seals found on board of them were also detained by the United States' authorities. The authority under which these seizures were made is apparently :— 1. A letter of instructions from the Acting Secretary of the Treasury of the United States to Mr. D'Ancona, the Collector of Customs at San Francisco, dated the 12th March, 1881, with inclosures (A of Appendix). 2. A letter from the Secretary of the United States' Treasury to the Collector of Customs at San Francisco, dated the 16th March, 1886, confirming the instructions given to Mr. D'Ancona in 1881, and ordering publication of the same (B of Appendix). 3. The Revised Statutes of the United States, the 1596th Section of which prohibits the^killing of fur-bearing animals within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, and Sections 1960 and 1961 of which prohibit the killing of male seals, except at certain times, and under certain restrictions, and of female seals at any time, upon the Islands of St. Paul and St, George, or in the waters adjacent thereto. The master and mate of the schooner "Thornton" were subsequently (the 13th August last) brought for trial before Judge Dawson, in the United States' District Court at Sitka. The evidence given by the officers of the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin " was to the effect that the "Thornton " was seized while in Behring's Sea, about 60 or 70 miles south-south-east of St. George's Island, for the offence of hunting and killing seals within that part of Behring's Sea which was ceded to the United States by Russia in 1867. The Judge in his charge to the jury quoted the 1st Article of the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867, between Russia and the United States, in which the boundary of Alaska is defined as follows :— " The western limit, within which the territories and dominion conveyed are contained, passes through a point in Behring's Straits on the parallel of 65° 30' north latitude, at its intersection by the meridian which passes midway between the Island of Krusenstern or Igualook and the Island of Ratmanoff or Noonarbook, and proceeds due north, without limitation, into the same Frozen Ocean. The same western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds then in a straight course nearly southwest through Behring's Straits and Behring's Sea, so as to pass midway between the north-west^ point of the Island of St. Lawrence and the south-east point of Cape Choukotski, to the meridian of 172° west longitude, thence from the intersection of that meridian in a south-westerly direction, so as to pass midway between the Island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Kormandorski couplet or group, in the North Pacific Ocean, to the meridian of 193° west longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whole of the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian." Executive Documents, 2nd Session, 40th Con, , The Judge is reported to have ^ ' All the waters within the boundary set forth in this Treaty to the western end Aleutian Archipelago and chain of island, are to be considered as comprised waters of Alaska, and all the penalties prescribed by law against the fur-bearing animals, must therefore attach against any violation of law cess, vol. xiii, document 177. gone on to say :— the of th within killing within the limits before described. SI f If, therefore, the jury believe from the evidence that the defendants did by themselves or in conjunction with others, on or about the time charged in the information, kill any otter, mink, martin, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal or animals, on the stores of Alaska, or in the Behring's Sea, east of the 193° of west longitude, the jury should find the defendants guilty, and assess their punishment separately, at a fine of not less than 200 dollars, nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisonment not more than six months, or by both, such fines within the limits herein set forth, and imprisonment." The jury found the prisoners guilty, and the master of the "Thornton" was sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment and to pay a fine of 500 dollars, while the mate was sentenced to a like term of imprisonment and to pay a fine of 300 dollars. It appears from a telegraphic despatch of the 18th September last that the masters and mates of the " Onward " and " Caroline " have since also been tried, and sentenced to undergo penalties similar to those inflicted on the master and mate of the "Thornton." The Sub-Committee do not here propose to comment on the enlarged construction placed by Judge Dawson on the words " adjacent waters" in the clauses of the Revised Statutes above referred to, further than to remark in passing that its effect would be to convert a purely municipal prohibition into an international obligation, and to claim for the United States a jurisdiction which their Government have in the. past not only declined themselves to assert, hut which they have strenuously resisted when claimed by another Power. The following brief instance will illustrate the position taken by the United States' Government in the recent past: As late as the 19th April, 1872, Mr. Boutwell, then Secretary of the United States' Treasury, in answer to a request made to him that a Revenue cutter should be sent to the region of Minnak Pass to prevent Australian and Hawaiian vessels from taking seals on their annual migration to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, declined to accede to the request, and added:— " In addition, I do not see that the United States would have.the jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for that purpose, unless they made such attempts within a marine league of the shore." Going further back in date, the Sub-Committee find that in 1822 a claim to sovereignty- over the Pacific Ocean north of the 51st degree of latitude was put forward by Russia. An Imperial Ukase, issued on the 4th (16th) September, 1821, regulating commerce, whaling, and fishing along the eastern coast of Siberia, the north-western coast of North America, and the Aleutian and other islands, and prohibiting all foreign vessels from landing on the coasts and islands belonging to Russia, or approaching them within less than 100 Italian miles, was communicated to the American Government on the 11th February, 1822 (C of Appendix). The Honourable John Quincy Adams, at that time United States' Secretary of State, wrote on the 25th of the same month to M. de Poletica, the Russian Minister Plenipotentiary, expressing the surprise of the President of the United States at the assertion of a territorial claim by Russia extending to the 51st degree of north latitude on this continent; stating that the exclusion of American vessels from the shore beyond the ordinary distance to which the territorial jurisdiction extends had excited still greater surprise; and requesting an explanation of the grounds of right, upon principles generally recognized by the laws and usages of nations, which could warrant such claims. M. de Poletica, in a despatch dated the 16th (28th) February, 1882, defends the prohibition as designed to suppress the furnishing by foreigners of arms and ammunition to the natives of Russian America. He adds, however:— "The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas (' mers ferm^es'), and the Russian Government might, consequently, judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especially that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners. But it preferred only asserting its essential rights, without taking any advantage of localities." Mi. Adams deemed it a sufficient answer to this claim to point out the fact that the " distance from shore to shore on this sea in latitude 51° north, is not less than 90° of longitude, or 4,000 miles." (State Papers, vol. ix, p. 471 et seq.) A writer in the " North American Review," in an article published a few months later, says, with respect to Mr. Adams' answer, "A volume on the subject could not have placed the absurdity of the pretensions more glaringly before us." ("North American Review," vol. xv, p. 389.) 32 The position was relinquished by Russia after much negotiation and correspondence (see American State Papers, Foreign Relations, vol. v, p. 432), and on the 17th April, 1824, a Convention was concluded between the United States and.that country which was ratified at Washington on the 12th January, 1825, and of which the 1st Article is as follows:— 11. It is agreed that in any part of the great ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean, or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts upon points which may not already have been occupied for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following Articles." (State Papers, vol. xii, p. 595.) The conditions and restrictions relate chiefly to the prevention of illicit trade in spirituous liquors, fire-arms, &c. Negotiations between Great Britain and Russia on the subject of the same Ukase, and the prohibition above referred to, resulted in a Treaty between the two Powers, concluded on the 16th (28th) February, 1825, and containing the following provision, in which the right of fishing and navigation, by Great Britain in any part of the Pacific Ocean is recognized:— " 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, in 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 following Articles." (State Papers, vol. xii, p. 38.) So far as the Sub-Committee are aware, the claim was never revived until it is now for the first time put forward by the United States. It does not appear necessary to insist at any great length that the conditions attaching to maria clausa cannot by any possibility be predicated of Behring's Sea, and that the seizure of Canadian vessels at a distance of over 100 miles from the mainland and 70 miles from the nearest island constitutes a high-handed extension of maritime jurisdiction unprecedented in the law of nations, but the Sub-Committee cannot conclude without inviting the earnest attention of Her Majesty's Government to the fact that Canadian citizens seized while engaged in the pursuit of their lawful vocation upon the high seas, and more than 70 miles from the nearest land, have been dragged before a foreign Court, their property confiscated, and themselves thrown into prison, where they still remain. The Sub-Committee express their confident hope that such representations will be at once made to the United States' Government as will secure the immediate release of .the imprisoned men, and full reparation for all losses and damage sustained by them. The Committee concur in the foregoing Report, and they advise that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute, if approved, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies and to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. All which is respectfully submitted for your ExceUency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Appendix (A). Mr. S. F. French, Acting Secretary, Treasury Department, to Mr. D. A. D'Ancona, 717, O'Farrell Street, San Francisco, California, March 12, 1886. [See Inclosure 7 in No. 3.] Appendix (B). Mr. D. Manning, Secretary, Treasury Department, to the Collector of Customs, San Francisco, March 16, 1886. [See Inclosure 7 in No. 3.] 33 Appendix (C). Edict of Hi* Imperial Majesty, Autocrat of All the Russia*. The Directing Senate maketh known unto all men: whereas, in an Edict of His Imperial Majesty issued to the Directing Senate on the 4th day of September, and signed by His Imperial Majesty's own hands, it is thus expressed:— " Observing from reports submitted to us that the trade of our subjects on the Aleutian Islands and on the north-vest coast of America, appertaining unto Russia, is subjected, because of illicit and secret traffic, to oppression and impediments, and finding that the principal cause of these difficulties is the want of Rules establishing the boundaries for navigation along these coasts, and the order of naval communication, as well in these places as on the whole of the eastern coast of Siberia and the Kurile Islands, we have deemed it necessary to determine these communications by specific Regulations which are hereto attached " In forwarding these Regulations to the Directing Senate, we command that the same be published for universal information, and that proper measures be taken to carry them into execution. Countersigned: (Signed) "Count D. GURD2F, Minister of Finance." It is therefore decreed by the Directing Senate that His Imperial Majesty's Edict be published for the information of all men, and that the same be obeyed by all whom it may concern. The original is signed by the Directing Senate. On the original is written in the handwriting of His Imperial Majesty thus— " Be it accordingly, (Signed) "ALEXANDER" Section 1. The pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishery, and of all other industry on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of northern latitude, also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring's Straits to the south cape of the Island of Urup, viz., to the 45° 50' northern latitude, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects. Section 2. It is therefore prohibited to all foreign vessels, not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging to Russia, as stated ahove, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The transgressor's vessel is subject to confiscation, along with the whole cargo. Sir, Ottawa, April 9, 1886. I have the honour to transmit herewith a letter just received from Mr. Theodore Lubbe, the managing owner of our British Columbian sealing fleet, and dated the 30th ultimo; the newspaper clipping attached* thereto fully explains the matter embodied thereio, and, as will be at once seen, it is a matter of vital importance to our fishing industry and commercial enterprises generally that the same should engage the attention of the Government at the very earliest possible moment, in order that the owners may be apprised with as little delay as possible how they are to act. I would therefore respectfully urge that the whole subject be referred to his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, so that I may be informed as quickly as is reasonably possible what reply to telegraph ; should this mode of procedure be irregular or undesirable, then I would most respectfully ask that such other steps be taken in the premises as to you may appear necessary or expedient, so as to avert trouble in the closely approaching season alluded to, and remove all doubt as to the rights of the parties on the " high seas," or otherwise, as may appear to be reasonably consistent. I have, &c. (Signed) EDGAR CROW-BAKER, M.P., Vice-President, British Columbian Board of Trade. The Honourable the Secretary of State. Mr. Lubbe to Mr. E. Crow-Baker, M.P., Victoria, British Columbia, March 30, 1886. [See Inclosure 8 in No. 3, p. 7.] Contraband Seal Hunting. Noticing in your issue of the " Call" of the 25th instant an article referring to the Alaska Fur Company's territory, to oblige a number of your subscribers will you kindly inform us if a vessel hunting seal a marine league off shore in Behring's Sea would be liable to seizure, or does the marine league limit apply to that territory as it does to ali land in the high seas ? Several Interested Subscribers. [128} F 34 Section 1956, Revised Statutes of the United States, prohibits the killing of fur- bearing animals within the limits of Alaska Territory or the waters thereof, except under an authorization from the Secretary of the Treasury, and it further provided that the Seeretarv shall not grant any special privileges under this section. Then comes the inquiry : " ?| hat is included in the term, ' the waters thereof ? " The Treaty by which Alaska jyas ced^d to the United States by Russia defines the boundaries of the jurisdiction thus conveyed. The western limit, which extends out on the high seas (a questionable conveyance) as far as the meridian of 103° west longitude, so as to include the whole of the Aleutian Archipelago, and thence proceeds north-west to the intersection of the meridian 172° west with the parallel of 65° 30' north, passes through the middle of Bcliring's Straits, midway between the Islands of Kousentern,- or Ignalook, and Rotmanoff, and thence due north without limitation into the Frozen Ocean. By Act of Congress the laws of the United States arc extended over all this territory and water. As Behring's Straits at its narrowest is 36 miles wide, 9 miles from the AUlsfcan mainland coast would not begin to reach the western limit of our purchase from Russia, and until the right of the United States' Government to exclusive jurisdiction over those waters is successfully controverted, you must not violate the law of Congress, by killing seals therein, without the consent of the Secretary of the Treasury, on peril of confiscation. " According to the current of modern authority," says Chancellor Kent, " the general territorial jurisdiction extends into the sea as far as a cannon-shot will reach, and no farther, and this is generally calculated to be a marine league (3 miles), and the Congress of the United States has recognized this limitation." The claim of Russia to sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean north of the 5]§t degree of latitude, as a close sea, w$S censkktsd by ouv Government in 1§22 as being against the rights of other nations, but now, as we have bought Russia out, it is all right. One's opinions change according to one's standpoint, and besides, cannons shoot farther now than they used to. Public No. 130. An Act to prevent the Extermination of Fur-bearing Animals in Alaska. [See Inclosure 1 in No. 6.] Letter dated Treasury Department, Wqshington, D.C., Alpril 19, 1872. [See Inclosure 6 in No. 3.] Indenture dated August 3, 1870, [See Inclosure 3 in No. 6.] The Alaska Seizures. Extract from the Brooklyn " Eagle." [See Inclosure in No. 13.] Government House, Victoria, British Columbia, (Extract.) August 26, 18S6. I have the honour to report that a few days since I received a telegram from Mr. Mason, Acting British Consul at San Francisco, to the following effect:— I' Caroline ' and \ Thornton ' seized by United States' steamer ' Corwin ' for illegal sealing; about twenty men from them put on board ' St. Paul' arrived here last night; they ask me for protection and to send them to Victoria. Advise me what to do. They are not charged with anything." Upon receipt of this I arranged with the owners of the | Caroline " and " Thornton " for the return of the men here, and they arrived on the the 23rd. The | Caroline" and " Thornton," belonging to different owners, are sloops owned here and fitted out here for the prosecution of seal fishing in the North Pacific and Behring's Sea. It seems from the accounts given that they were peaceably pursuing their vocations and not within 70 miles of land when they were seized by United States' Revenue steamer "Corwin," as above stated. Some of the men were shipped to San Francisco; the sloops and their masters are retained in some Alaska port. I inclose a cutting from a newspaper published here, which gives as correct an account of the matter as we have at present, and also a statement of the facts relating to the transfer to the United States of the Russian-American possessions and of the lease and 35 concessions granted by the Government of the United States to the Company above mentioned. The matter has been already laid before the Honourable the Minister of Marine" and Fisheries, who opportunely arrived here a few days after my receiving information of it; but I beg to call your earnest attention to it, so that, the whole case being laid before the Imperial authorities, steps may be taken not only to cause reparations to be made for the outrage committed, but to definitely prevent any possible repetition of it. The Sealing- Schooner Seizures. As the late seizures of an American and three British sealing schooners by an American Revenue cutter in the Behring's Sea are almost certain to lead to international complications on account of the extravagarice of the assumption Upon which those seizures were made, a brief history of the events which led up to them will be acceptable at the present time. In March 1867 a Treaty was made between Russia and the United States, by which Russia ceded all its possessions in British North America to the Government of the United States. One of the terms of that Treatv declared that the western limit, within Which the territories and dominion conveyed are contained, passes through a point in Behring's Straits on the parallel of 65° 30' north latitude at its intersection by tn| meridian which passes midway between the Islands of Krhsenstern or Ignalook, dfifi proceeds due north without limitation, into f,he same Frozen Ocean. The sattife western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds thence in a coarse nearly south-west through Behring's Sea, so as to pass midway between the north-west point of St. Lawrence' and tbe south-east point of Cape Choutkotski to the meridian of 172° west longitude*, thence from the intersection of that meridian in a south-westerly direction so as to pass midway between the Island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Korfhandorski Couplet or group in the North Pacific Ocean to the meridian of 193° west longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whole of the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian. So far, so good. In July 1870, in the 2nd Session of the 41st Congress, an Act was passed eiititl&o! I An Act to prevent the Extermination of Fur-bearing Animals in Alaska,'' In Which the number of seals to be killed for their skins was limited on St. Paul's and St. George s Islands to 75,000 j)er annum on each islifnd, with power by the Secretary Of the Treasury to further limit the number if necessary, and giving that official ptiwer to lease for rental mentioned in this Act, to proper and responsible parties, to the best advantage of the United States, having due regard to the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants, the parties hitherto engaged in trade, and the protection of the seal fisheries, for a term of twenty-five years from May 1870, the right to engage in taking seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George. Another section declares that any person who shall kill any fur-seals on either of the said islands, or in the waters adjacent thereto, without authority from the lessees thereof, or interfere with them in the lawful prosecution of their duty, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanour, and shall for each offence or conviction be punished, and all their vessels, tackle, apparel, appurtendnces, and cargo shall be forfeited to the United States. In the month following the passage of this Act, that is in August 1870, a lease called the Seal Island Lease was executed between the United States' Goyehimferif, dnd the Alaska Commercial Company, a Corporation established in California. In return for the exclusive privilege of taking for twenty years (with certaifi restrictions) fur-se&ls in the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, the, lessees agreed to pay the Government ah annual sum of 55,000 dollars, 2 dol. 62^-c. for each seal-skin takfen, 55 cents for each gallon of seal-oil sold, and to annually provide the natives with a certain qdantity of provisions and fuel. The months of June, July, September, arid October were, moreover, the only months during which the capture of the seals could be prosecuted. Under this lease or Concession this Company has perpetuated its monopoly for sixteen years, reaping a vast profit therefrom. Not satisfied with the prolific source of its supply, and the facilities afforded it for engaging in the business, the Company has sought and practically succeeded in controlling the fur-seal market by its aggressiveness in pretending to construe the term I and the waters adjacent thereto " as meaning that vast sea of waters included in the limits of cession named in the Russo-American Treaty of 1867. In this interpretation it has received the unrelaxed support of the United States' Government, whose interests in the matter are identical with those of the Company; and here it may be remarked that the royalty paid by the latter furnishes a handsome profit Upon the purchase-money of Alaska Territory. One or two American Revenue cutters are always cruizing in .the [128] I F 2 36 Behring's Sea and that portion of the North Pacific to the south of the Aleutian Islands, ever on the alert to prevent any vessels but those of the Alaska Commercial Company from capturing seals there. Meeting with no effectual opposition, and the cost of litigation precluding any chances of success for the appellant, the Government has become more and more aggressive, until finally, changing from a defensive to an offensive supervision, their action has culminated in the deliberate seizure of three British sailing schooners upon, whatever a national greed may declare to the contrary, the high and open seas, recognized by international law as part of the world's great highway, free to the commerce of all countries, and a natural means of intercourse of all nations. It is laid down as one of the first principles of maritime and commercial international law that the open sea or main ocean is, like the atmosphere, free for common use to all mankind, and cannot be appropriated by any State to the exclusion of the others. Bearing in mind the huge improbability of the act of the Revenue cutter not being in consonance with Governmental orders, what do we find ? That a nation, disregarding on one coast the the belt of the sea littoral which constitutes the range belonging to coast defence, is actually assuming On another coast supreme maritime jurisdiction over a waste of waters comprising half the northern part of a vast ocean. In the exercise of this self-arrogated authority foreign mercantile vessels are forcibly seized and, with their cargoes, are declared confiscated, while with an unaccountable magnanimity the crews, after being landed at an American port many hundred miles distant from the scene of their capture, are allowed to go at large. It may be advanced that if open to indiscriminate capture the fur-seal would have ere this become extinct, or nearly so. But though this has been the case with the seal in the southern regions it is a fact, which, deplorable as it may be, would furnish a most flimsy excuse to a Government whose regulation of the industry in Alaskan waters is prompted not by philanthropy, but by strictly mercenary considerations. So far has this latter disposition carried them as to cause them to become responsible for an act which, if committed by a vessel privately manned and owned, would bear but one interpretation. As it is, the act is one that is rash, aggressive, and, in the face of what is known, bitterly unjust, and is already spoken of as an unworthy means of reprisal for the late seizures made by Canada of American, fishing-vessels on the Atlantic coast. The sealing schooners when seized were over 70 miles from any land, and how, with this fact before them, the United States' Government can attempt, with any show of reason, to justify the conduct of the Commander of the " Corwin," it is difficult to imagine. With that evidence we have at hand, the seizures and detention are manifestly illegal, and representations of the affair through the proper official channels have already been forwarded to the Home Government. Britain is not belligerent, the strength she possesses—imparted by the commerce she conducts in every quarter of the globe—she does not misuse. Mr. Munroe to Mr. Spring, August 7, 1886. [See Inclosure 4 in No. 7.] Dear Sir, Victoria, British Columbia, November 15, 1886. As our sealing schooners will leave Victoria on or about the 10th December for the sealing expeditions of 1887, many of them will not return to Victoria until September, or, in other words, not until the Behring's Sea trip is completed. We are, accordingly, anxious to know what is being done in the case of our seized vessels, and whether or not we may look for protection against what we and even the American -press is pleased to term piracy. We have no occasion to interfere with the Alaska Commercial Company's rights on the Priboloff Islands, nor do our vessels come anywhere near land. The fact is, we take out at sea from 50 to 100 miles what the Honourable H. Elliot, of the Smithsonian Institute, in his Report of 1874 on the Seal Islands, calls | batchelor seals," or those not required on breeding-grounds, to which Report I would be pleased to call your attention. The industry is of too much importance to Canada to allow the Alaska Commercial Company to dictate who shall and who shall not take seals on the high or Behring's Sea. For the season of 1886 there was brought into Victoria from the Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and shipped therefrom to England and the United States, 50,000 skius, valued at about 350,000 dollars. It is evident that the business is worth protecting. Just here allow me to contradict a statement made by Special Agent Single, of the United States' Treasury Department, in which he says that three-fourths of the seals shot in the water sink and are lost. From the experience of our hunters I maintain but a small percentage is lost in this way, probably not over one in fifty. I doubt if the loss 37 is as great as that caused by the rejection of skins after being clubbed by the Alaska Commercial Company on the islands, to which reference is made in the Tables of Elliot's Report. The Americans themselves in 1824 repudiated Russia's claim to the Behring's Sea when Russia seized the Boston brig "Pearl" for whaling;. Two vears later Russia had to give the vessel up, and paid damages. In conclusion, I may say that the seized skins are liable to be valueless on account of neglect. Captain Ogilvie's body has been discovered; a jury was empanelled, and a verdict was given in accordance with the facts of the case. Hoping you may be pleased to advise us in this matter before our vessels sail, you will confer a great favour on vour most obedient servant. (Signed) WM. MUNSIE. The Honourable George E. Foster, Minister of Marine and Fisheries. No. 23. The Earl of Iddesleigh to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, January 8, 1887. REFERRING to previous correspondence in regard to the case of the three Canadian schooners engaged in the seal fishery in Behring's Sea, I transmit to you herewith a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office, with a despatch, and its inclosures, from the Governor-General of Canada, explaining the views of the Dominion Government in the matter.* Nearly four months have now elapsed since my despatch of the 9th September last was addressed to you, in which you were directed to invite the Government of the United States to furnish you with any particulars they might possess relative to the occurrence ; and further instructions were sent to you in my subsequent despatches of the 20th, 21st, and 30th October and the 18tb November, but up to the present date no reply has been received from that Government as to the alleged proceedings of their officials. I have now to instruct you to express to Mr. Bayard the concern of Her Majesty's Government at receiving no reply to the serious representations which they have felt compelled to make on the information which has reached them respecting the proceedings of the United States' cruizer "Corwin" in seizing British sealing schooners on the high seas, and to urge, with all the force which the gravity of the case requires, the immediate attention of the United States' Government to the action of the American authorities in their treatment of these vessels, and of their masters and crews. I am, &c. (Signed) IDDESLEIGH. No. 24. Sir L. West to the Earl of Iddesleigh.—(Received January 21.) My Lord, Washington, January 10, 1887. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 8th instant, and to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I immediately addressed to the Secretary of State, referring to my notes of the 27th September, 21st October, and 7th December last, and to your Lordship's despatch of the 30th October, copy of which I placed in his hands on the 12th November, and expressing the sense in which Her Majesty's Government view:ed his silence with regard to the communications which had been made to him respecting the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Sir, I HAVI of Tddesleigh. Inclosure in No. 24. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Washington, January 9, 1887. the honour to inform you that I have received instructions from the Earl Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, again to * No. 22, .■■■: uiiuiiLBjAumaatatti* 38 brin0, to your notice the grave representations made by Her Majesty's Government respecting the seizure of the British vessels "Carolina," "Onward," and "Thornton" in Behring's Sea, bv the United States' cruizer " Corwin," to which no reply has as yet been returned. On the 27th September last I had the honour to address to you a note in which I stated that Her Majesty's Government requested to be furnished with any particulars which the United States' Government might possess relative to this occurrence. On the 21st October last I had the honour to inform you that I was instructed by the Earl of Iddesleigh to protest, in the name of Her Majesty's Government, against such seizures, and to reserve all rights to compensation. In a note dated the 12th November last you were good enough to explain the delay which had occurred in answering these communications, and, on the same day, I had the honour to communicate to you a despatch from the Earl of Iddesleigh, a copy of which, at your request, I placed in your hands. On the 7th ultimo I again had the honour to address you, stating that vessels were equipping in British Columbia for fishing in Behring's Sea, and that the Canadian Government were desirous of ascertaining whether such vessels fishing in the open sea, and beyond the territorial waters of Alaska, would be exposed to seizure, and that Her Majesty's Government would be glad if some assurance could be given that, pending the settlement of the questions, no such seizures of British vessels would be made in Behring's Sea. The vessels in question were seized at a distance of more than 60 miles from the nearest land at the time of their seizure. The master of the "Thornton" was sentenced to imprisonment for thirty days, and to pay a fine of 500 dollars, and there is reason to believe that the masters oi the | Onward " and | Carolina" have been sentenced to similar penalties. In support of this claim to jurisdiction over a stretch of sea extending in its widest part some 600 or 700 miles from the mainland, advanced by the Judge in his charge to the jury, the authorities are alleged to have interfered with the peaceable and lawful occupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas, to have taken possession of their ships, to have subjected their property to forfeiture, and to have visited upon their persons the indignity of imprisonment. Such proceedings therefore, if correctly reported, would appear to have been in violation of the admitted principle of international law. Under these circumstances, Her Majesty's Government do not hesitate to express their concern at not having received any reply to their representations, nor do they wish to conceal the grave nature which the case has thus assumed, and to which I am now instructed to call your immediate and most serious attention. It is unnecessary for me to allude further to the information with which Her Majesty's Governinent has been furnished respecting these seizures of British vessels in the open seas, and which, for some time past, has been in the possession of the United States' Government, because Her Majesty's Government do not doubt that if, on inquiry, it should prove to be correct, the Government of the United States will, with their well- known sense of justice, admit the illegality of the proceedings resorted to against the British vessels and the British subjects above mentioned, and will cause reasonable reparation to be made for the wrongs to which they have been subjected, and for the losses which they have Sustained. In conclusion, I have the honour again to refer to your note of the 12th November last, and to what you said verbally to me on the same day, and to express the hope that tlie cause of the delay complained of in answering the representations of Her Majesty's Gbveftimeht on this grave and important matter may be speedily removed. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 25. Sir L. West to Her Majesty's Secretary of State, Foreign Office.—(Received January 26.) My Lord, Washington, January 13, 1887. WITH reference to my despatch of the 7th instant, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I have received from the Secretary of State in answer to my communication expressing the concern of Her Majesty's Government at receiving no reply to their representations respecting the seizure of British vessels in Bel inns Sea. I have, (Signed) zc. L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. 39 Inclosure in No. 25. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, January 12, 1887. YOUR note of the 9th instant was received by me on the next day, and I regret exceedingly that, although my efforts have been diligently made to procure from Alaska the authenticated copies of the judicial proceedings in the cases of the British vessels "Carolina," "Onward/ and "Thornton," to which you refer, I should not have been able to obtain them in time to have made the urgent and renewed application of the Earl of Iddesleigh superfluous. The pressing nature of your note constrains me to inform you that on the 27th September last, when I received my first intimation from you that any question was possible as to the validity of the judicial proceedings referred to, I lost no time in requesting my colleague the Attorney-General, in whose Department the cases were, to procure for me such authentic information as would enable me to make full response to your application. From week to week I have been awaiting the arrival of the papers, and to-day, at my request, the Attorney-General has telegraphed to Portland, in Oregon, the nearest telegraph station to Sitka, in Alaska, in order to expedite the furnishing of the desired papers. You will understand that my wish to meet the questions involved in the instructions you have received from your Government is averred, and that the delay has been enforced by the absence of requisite information as to the facts. The distance of the vessels from any land, or the circumstances attendant upon their seizure, are unknown to me, save by the statements in your last note, and it is essential that such facts should be devoid of all uncertainty. Of whatever information may be in the possession of Her Majesty's Government I have, of course, no knowledge or means of knowledge, but this Department of the Govern* ment of the United States has not yet been placed in possession of that accurate information which would justify its decision in a question which you are certainly warranted in considering to be of grave importance. I shall diligently endeavour to procure the best evidence possible of the matters inquired of, and will make due response thereupon when the opportunity of decision is afforded to me. You require no assurance that no avoidance of our international obligations need be apprehended. I have, &c. (Signed) T F. BAYARD. No. 26. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, January 27, 1887; WITH reference to your despatch of the 13th instant, I have to request you to make a point of inquiring from time to time whether the United States' Government have received the expected information with regard to the seizures of British vessels engaged in seal-fishing in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. ^o.27. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, February 4.) My Lord, Washington, February 4, 1887. I HAVING reason to believe thai the President was about to take some action.in the case of the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea, I addressed a note, copy of which is inclosed, to the Secretary of State, after the receipt of your Lordship<'s telegram of the 27th ultimo, inquiring whether the United States' Government had- received the information and papers connected therewith; and I now have the honour to inclose copy of a note which 1 have received in reply thereto, stating that the papers in question were expected within a fortnight, and informing me that in the meanwhile, without conclusion at 40 this time of any questions involved, orders have been issued by the President for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith, which information I telegraphed to your Lordship this day. Since the receipt of the Earl of Iddesleigh's telegram of the 6th December last I have from time to time endeavoured to obtain a decision in the sense of the note, now addressed to me, which, as far as it goes, will, I trust, be considered by Her Majesty's Government as a satisfactory result. In accordance with the instruction contained in the above-mentioned telegram, I have communicated this result to the Governor-General of Canada. I have, &tc. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No, 27. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, Februa ry 1886. I HAVE the honour to inform you that, under date of the 27th ultimo, the Marquis of Salisbury instructs me to inquire wdiether the information and papers relative to the seizure of the British schooners " Carolina," the United States' Government. Onward," and " Thornton " have reached I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVTL Inclosure 2 in No. 27. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, February 3, 1887. I BEG to acknowledge your note of yesterday's date, received to-day. Upon its receipt I made instant application to my colleague the Attorney-General in relation to the record of the judicial proceedings in the cases of the three British vessels arrested in August last in Behring's Sea for violation of the United States' Laws regulating the Alaskan seal fisheries. I am informed that the documents in question left Sitka on the 26th January, and may be expected to arrive at Port Townsend, in Washington Territory, about the 7th instant, so that the papers, in the usual course of mail, should be received by me within a fortnight. In this connection, I take occasion to inform you that, without conclusion at this time of any questions which may be found to be involved in these cases of seizure, orders have been issued, by the President's direction, for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in con-, nection therewith. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 28. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 9.) Sir, Downing Street, February 8, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of Canadian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Secretary Sir H. Holland to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch, with its inclosures, from the Governor-General of Canada on the subject. Sir H. Holland will be glad to be* informed of any action which Lord Salisbury may think proper to take upon this despatch, in order that the Marquis of Lansdowne may be apprised accordingly. I am, &c. £ (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. 41 Inclosure 1 in No. 28. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Mr. Stanhope.. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, January 15, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of Canadian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to transmit to you, in order tbat reparation may be sought from the United States' Government, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council of Canada, submitting papers containing full statements of claims for damage sustained and compensation demanded by the owners, masters, and mates of the schooners "Onward," "Thornton," and " Carolina." I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 28. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 3rd January, 1887. ON a Report dated the 27th December, 1886, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting papers containing full statements of claims for damage sustained and compensation demanded by the owners, masters, and mates of the sealing schooners "Onward," "Thornton," and "Carolina," which vessels were seized by the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin" in Behring's Sea in August 1886, and concerning which full representations have been made to Her Majesty's Government in despatches bearing date respectively the 23rd and 24th September and the 29th November, 1886, and recommending that copies of the same be transmitted to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, in order that reparation may be sought from the United States' Government for all damages and loss to British subjects consequent upon the illegal action of the United Slates' officers in the cases referred to: The Committee, concurring in the above, advise that your Excellency be moved to transmit copies of the papers accordingly. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Documents annexed to preceding Report. The Claim of Daniel Munroe, Master of the British Schooner " Onward." I claim against the Government of the United States, or whom it may concern, the sum of 8,000 dollars for loss of wages, lay-out, damages, and indemnity for illegal seizure of the schooner " Onward " by the Commander of the United States' steamer " Corwin " in Behring's Sea on the 1 st August, 1886, or thereabouts, and for detention and subsequent wrongful imprisonment in gaol at Sitka. (Daniel JNlunroe, by his Attorney in fact), (Signed) EDGAR CROW-BAKER. Victoria, British Columbia, October 20, 1886. The Claim of Hans Guttormsen, Master of the British Schooner " Thornton." I claim against the Government of the United States, or whom it may concern, the sum of 8,000 dollars for loss of wages, lay-out, damages, and indemnity for illegal seizure of the schooner " Thornton " by the Commander of the United States' steamer " Corwin " in the Behring's Sea on the 1st August, 1886, and for detention and subsequent wrongful imprisonment in gaol at Sitka. (Hans Guttormsen, by his Attorney in fact), (Signed) EDGAR CROW-BAKER. Victoria, British Columbia, October 20, 1886. [128] G 42 Damages claimed by the owner of Schooner " Carolina " in respect of her Seizure by the United States' Steam-ship " Corwin " while fishing in Behring's Sea. British Columbia, to wit. I, William Munsie, of Victoria, British Columbia, owner of the British schooner 1 Carolina," do solemnly and sincerely declare:— 1. That the value of the said vessel at the time of her seizure by the United States' steam-ship "Corwin" was 4,000 dollars, and the cost of her outfit, when she left Victoria for the Behring's Sea, was 3,000 dollars. 2. That she carried a crew of eleven men, and the estimated wages due to the master and men for four months from the 15th day of May, 1886, to the time of the return of the said men to Victoria is 4,500 dollars. 3. That at the time of her capture by the " Corwin " she had 686 seal-skins, which were worth, at 7 dollars each, 4,802 dollars. 4. That the probable catch for the season, estimated from the number of skins taken by the schooner " Mary Ellen," which was 3,554 skins, and by the number of skins taken when the said schooner was captured, would be 3,000 skins, the value of which would be 21,000 dollars. 5. That the loss sustained by me in consequence of the detention of the said schooner, and my being unable to employ her in ordinary work after the sealing season is over, is 450 dollars a-month, which sum I claim until the vessel is returned home in good order and condition. 6. That I have also paid and incurred liabilities connected with the arrest of the said vessel, and in defence of the master and crew, for legal and other expenses, 1,000 dollars. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the Same to be true, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled " An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (L.S.) (Signed) WILLIAM MUNSIE. Taken and declared before me this 20th October, 1886. (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, Notary Public, Victoria, British Columbia. Damages claimed by the Owner of the i Onward I and " Favourite " in respect of their Seizure by the United States' Steam-ship " Corwin" while fishing in Behring's Sea. British Columbia, to wit. I, Charles Spring, of Victoria, British Columbia, owner of the British schooners | Onward " and " Favourite," do solemnly and sincerely declare:— 1. That the value of the said vessel "Onward" at the time of her seizure by the United States' steam-ship <c Corwin " was 4,000 dollars, and the cost of the outfit when she left Victoria for the Behring's Sea was 1,000 dollars. 2. That she carried a crew of twenty men, and the estimated wages due to the master and men for four months from the 12th day of June to the time of their return to Victoria is 7,500 dollars. 3. That at the time of her capture by the " Corwin § she had 400 seal-skins, which were worth 2,800 dollars. 4. That the probable catch for the season estimated on the number of skins taken by other schooners, and by the number of skins taken when the said schooner was captured, would be 3,000 skins, the value of which, at 7 dollars a skin, would be 21,000 dollars. 5. That the loss sustained by me in consequence of the detention of the said schooner, and my being unable to employ her in ordinary work after the sealing season, is over 500 dollars a-month, which sum I claim until the vessel is returned to me in good order and condition. 6. That I have also paid and incurred liabilities connected with the arrest of the said vessel, and in defence of the master and crew for legal and other expenses, 1,000 dollars, and I also claim 3,000 dollars damages, because the officer in command of the United States' steam-ship " Corwin " as she passed the " Favourite" ordered her to cease sealing, which she did, and thereby lost her season. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believin the same to be true, by 43 virtue of an Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled "An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (L.S.) (Signed) C. SPRING. Taken and declared before me this 18th October, 1886. (Signed) M. W. Ttrwhitt Drake, Notary Public, Victoria, British Columbia. Damages claimed by the Owner of the Steam-vessel " Thornton" for illegal Seizure by the United States' Steam-ship u Corwin" while fishing in Behring's Sea. British Columbia, to wit. I, James Douglas Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, owner of the British steam- vessel " Thornton," do solemnly and sincerely declare :— 1. That the value of the said vessel at the time of her seizure by the United States' steam-ship " Corwin " was 6,000 dollars, and the cost of her outfit when she left Victoria for the Behring's Sea was 4,000 dollars. 2. That she carried a crew of fifteen men, and the estimated wages due to the master and men for four months from the 26th day of May to the 1st day of October, the date of their return to Victoria, which I have to pay, is 5,100 dollars. 3. That at the time of her capture by the " Corwin " she had 403 seal-skins, which, at 7 dollars each, were worth 2,821 dollars. 4. That the probable catch for the season, estimated on the number of skins taken by the schooner " Mary Ellen," and by the number of skins taken when the said vessel was captured, would be 3,000, of the value of 21,000 dollars. 5. That the loss sustained by me in consequence of the detention of the said vessel, and by being unable to employ her in ordinary work after the sealing season is over, is 500 dollars a-montb, which sum I claim until the vessel is returned to me in good order and condition. 6. That I have also paid and incurred liabilities connected with the arrest of the said vessel, and defence of the master and crew for legal and other expenses, 1,000 dollars. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, by virtue of the Act passed in the 37th year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled " An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-judicial Oaths." (L.S.) (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Taken and declared at Victoria this 19th October, 1886, before me. (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, Notary Public. Victoria, British Columbia. I, James Blake, mate of the schooner " Carolina," claim 5,000 dollars as damages for my illegal arrest and imprisonment on board the " Corwin " and in goal at Sitka from the 1st August to the 16th September, 1886. (Signed) JAMES BLAKE. Witness: (Signed) M. W. Tjtrwhitt Drake. Victoria, British Columbia. 1, John Margotich, mate of the schooner " Onward," claim 5,000 dollars as damages for my illegal arrest and imprisonment on board the United States' vessel " Corwin" and in gaol at Sitka from the 23rd August, 1886, to the 29th September in the same year, j (John Margotich, by his Attorney), (Signed) C. SPRING. Witness: (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake. [128] G 2 m'UHiwwai 44 Victoria, British Columbia. I, Harry Norman, mate of the steamer " Thornton," claim as compensation for my illegal arrest and imprisonment on board the United States' steam-ship " Corwin " and in gaol at Sitka, the sum of 5,000 dollars, dated the 19th October, 1886. (Harry Norman, by his Attorney), (Signed) J. D. WARREN. October 19, 1886. Witness: (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake. Victoria, British Columbia. I, James Ogilvie, master of the schooner " Carolina," claim as compensation for my arrest and imprisonment on board the United States' steam-ship |jj Corwin " and in gaol at Sitka, the sum of 5,000 dollars, dated the 19th October, 1886. (James Ogilvie, by his Attorney), (Signed) A. J. BECKTIL. October 19, 1886. Witness: (Signed) M. W. Tsrwhitt Drake. Abstract of Damages. Damages as per Declaration. Schooner " Onward." Steam-ship " Thornton." Schooner " Carolina." Schooner " Favourite." Value of vessel and outfit Wages of crew .. .. Value of seal-skins on board ... .. Value of probable catch Loss sustained by detention, para. 5 Legal and other expenses .. .. Loss sustained by order to cease sealing .. Dollars. 5,000 7,500 2,800 21,000 l',000 Dollars. 10,000 5,100 2,821 21,000 1,000 Dollars. 7,000 4,500 4,802 21,000 1,000 Dollars. 3,000 For illegal Arrest and Imprisonment. Daniel Munroe, master of " Onward," for indemnity for illegal seizure, loss, &c. John Margotich, mate of " Onward," Harry Norman, mate of " Thornton," James Ogilvie, master of " Carolina," James Blake, mate of | Carolina," Hans Guttormsen, master of " Thornton," Dollars. 8,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 5,000 8,000 SHEA A_1~IA No. 29. j Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, February 14, 1887. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 8th instant, forwarding a copy of a despatch, with its inclosures, from the Governor-General of Canada, relating to the claims for damages sustained and compensation demanded by the owners, masters, and mates of the British schooners "Onward," "Thornton," and "Carolina," which were seized by the United States' Revenue cruizer Q Corwin " last August, while engaged in seal fishing in Behring's Sea. In reply, I am directed by his Lordship to request that you will suggest to Sir H. Holland that it might be desirable to defer laying these claims before the Government of the United States until Her Majesty's Government haVe had an opportunity of examining the statement as to the circumstances under which the seizures took place which is referred to in Sir L. West's telegram of the 4th instant, communicated to you on the following day. 45* f I am to add that, should this suggestion meet with Sir H. Holland's concurrence, instructions will be sent accordingly to Sir L. West. I am &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 30. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received February 15.) My Lord, Washington, January 30, 1887. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith the Report, of the Governor of Alaska for the year 1886. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 30. Extract from the Report of the Governor of Alaska for the Fiscal Year 1886. Protection of Fur Seal and Sea Otter. THE capture of one American and three British vessels while engaged in taking seals in the inland waters of Alaska by the Revenue cutter " Corwin " has no doubt been fully reported by her zealous and meritorious Commander, Captain C. A. Abbey, to the proper Department, and but for the fact that the officers and crews were brought to Sitka, and, together with the captured property, turned over to the United States' Marshal, the subject might not be considered one within the province of this Report. The masters and mates of the several vessels were tried at a special term of the District Court, and all convicted and sentenced to brief terms of imprisonment, and three of them to payment of fines ranging from 300 dollars to 500 dollars each. The terms of imprisonment of all save the master of the American vessel having very nearly expired on the 29th September, on the urgent request and recommendation of the honourable Judge of the District Court before whom the convictions were had, I granted j respites in the several cases, save the exception noted, and the prisoners were released and allowed to depart for their several homes. They were without means, and, had they been detained until the expiration of their sentences, would have become objects of charity among strangers until the sailing of the next monthly steamer. As these seizures have most probably raised an international question involving the right of the United States to exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of the Behring's Sea north of the Aleutian Islands and east of the 193rd meridian west longitude, it may not be unbecoming in me to suggest that unless that right is insisted upon and maintained, an industry which now yields a revenue equal to a fair rate of interest on the amount paid for tbe whole of Alaska will not only be destroyed, but the means of livelihood will likewise be taken away from a large number of people whom the Government is bound by every consideration of honour and public policy to protect. I can conceive of no other plan by which the seal fisheries can be preserved than the one long ago adopted and now in vogue; whether they ought not now to be yielding a very much larger revenue to the Government is a question to be discussed a year or two hence. It is reasonably certain, however, that unless our Government asserts and maintains the jurisdiction ceded to it by Russia, the Seal Islands will in a very few years be robbed of all present or prospective value to any one. It is just as essential to the preservation of this industry that the seals be protected against indiscriminate slaughter while on their way to and from their breeding places as that the number to be taken on the islands should be limited, and every necessary restriction imposed as to age, sex, and the mode of killing. The use of fire-arms is prohibited by law, even to the natives, in the killing of seal and other fur-bearing animals in Alaskan waters and on the islands thereof, and it would be a manifest act of injustice to them to permit either foreign or American vessels to enter and engage in the indiscriminate shooting of such animals in waters over which the United States claims and exercises 46 exclusive jurisdiction and control. Unless our right to such jurisdiction be waived or abandoned, seals once in Behring's Sea are as much the property of the United States as the islands themselves, and should be no less zealously guarded than are the Newfoundland cod-banks by the Dominion of Canada. Unless so guarded, chartered rights will not only be impaired, but a source of large and perpetual revenue to the Government utterly destroyed. But there are other than selfish reasons why the United States should insist upon its right to exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of Behring's Sea as far west as the boundary line described in the Treaty of Cession. The principal occupation of the inhabitants, some 10,000 or 12,000 in number, of the islands therein and adjacent thereto, is sea-otter hunting, an occupation which will be completely destroyed if its waters are thrown open to all who choose to enter. It is manifestly the duty of the Government to protect these people in the enjoyment of rights which to them are inherent; an abandonment of the jurisdiction claimed by us would be practically assenting that the people in question may be driven from their homes and the employment by which they and their fathers for generations remote have obtained a livelihood. Transportation Facilities needed. In the foregoing connection I desire to call attention to the imperative necessity which exists for some means of transportation for the officials of the Civil Government to and from the different parts of the Territory. In the present condition of affairs the Marshal can only reach a very few points to serve the processes of the Court, and in each and every case must undergo an enforced absence of at least a month. The civil officials are charged with the responsibility of enforcing the laws, and yet are not furnished with the means absolutely necessary to enable them to do so. The authorities at Washington do not seem to realize the fact that there are no waggon or other roads in Alaska, and that all travel muse necessarily be by water. Crimes are reported from the various places of settlement, but the executive officers have no available means of going from place to place to make arrests and enforce the laws. Smuggling is carried on, distilled spirits are being surreptitiously imported into the Territory in spite of the decision of the District Court, thousands of dollars' worth of dutiable merchandize is imported across the border from British Colombia, and we are powerless to prevent any of these things. If a sprightly Revenue cutter could be stationed here with orders to cruize in the inland waters of South-eastern Alaska, and give aid to the Civil Government, by carrying its officers to points necessary to be visited by them on official business, bringing witnesses and jurors, &c, I am reasonably certain the lawlessness now so prevalent could be broken up, the Government's revenues secured, the laws enforced, and life and property rights fully protected. Until something is done in this direction to enable the officials to perform their duties, civil government in Alaska will be little better than a ridiculous farce. The following letter, addressed to me by the District Attorney, fully explaius the necessity of the case, and how it may be provided for without detriment, but rather to the advantage of the Revenue Marine Service:— I (District of Alaska, District Attorney's Office.) j Sir, | Sitka, September 20, 1886. "As the official charged with the institution of the initiatory judicial proceedings' against parties becoming liable to answer for breach of the laws in this district, I desire to call your attention to a most serious want in the facilities necessary to enable the officers of the Court to perform their duty effectively. We are, as matters now stand, entirely dependent on the line of monthly mail-steamers from Port Townsend, Washington, to Sitka, for any certain or regular means of getting to or from other places in the district, being thus not only limited in communication to three or four other Settlements, but also forced to an absence from Sitka of not less than one and possibly two months in any event in which it becomes necessary to visit them. Besides this, there are many Settlements where important business enterprises are located needing protection, which we are not able to visit at all. " At one of these, Newchuk, some 300 or 400 miles up the coast to the west, a trader was brutally murdered by Indians last December. Valuable mineral discoveries have just been made in that section which it is proposed very soon to develop, and there are large fishing establishments near and trading posts from which appeals have been sent to such officials as could be reached, to have the case inquired into and the offenders punished. 47 The facts in this case are undoubted, and action by the authorities most essential to the interests and protection of all residents. There is also a report of a murder at.the Island of Unga, but not yet fully confirmed. There is certainly need of inquiry into certain larcenies and other lawless acts at Kadiak. "I am utterly powerless to institute the necessary examinations into these cases, in order to bring the parties to justice, and my inability and that of the Court to punish them must continue until we have the means of reaching those localities furnished us. "Another case is in point: There are now lying at Ounalaska three English schooners, seized for violation^ of our laws against killing fur-bearing animals within the Territory. The cargoes of these and one other schooner, consisting of over 2,000 seal-skins, forfeited under these laws, are stored at the same place. Under the necessary proceedings in our Court these vessels and their cargoes have been decreed forfeited, and the Marshal will be required to sell them. He is absolutely without the means of getting to Ounalaska at all unless he goes by way of San Francisco, and can only carry out the orders of the Court at the most serious inconvenience. In fact, in the absence of the needed facilities for direct intercommunication between the several sections and Settlements of this district, it is plain that the interests of the Government must greatly suffer, as they have already done, together with those of the people. I It would be an easy and simple thing to supply this need, at no material*increase of expense, in the protection of the Government's interest in Alaska, but rather to their positive advantage. A Revenue vessel stationed at Sitka, subject to the reasonable necessities of the Civil Government, could attend to all the wants occurring, without detriment to the service, necessary for the protection of the seal fisheries and the rights of the lessees of the Pribyioff Islands. Indeed, being here much nearer the waters in which such service is required than she would be at any station lower down the coast, she could perform that duty more conveniently, and at the same time would be able to put a stop to much of the smuggling and illegal importation of liquors into South-eastern Alaska which is now going on. I There is no doubt that the service necessary in order to make the present civil and: judicial government of this Territory something more than a mockery to a large portion of its area and people could be effectually rendered in this way, and the other interests which it is thought necessary to protect by the same means promoted. I trust you will, therefore, represent this necessity to our Government in your forthcoming Report. There are many ways in which it is seriously felt, but which it would be unprofitable to specif^ L ": Very truly yours, "Hon. A. P. Swinefbrd, " Governor of Alaska." (Signed) "M. D. Ball,, " United States' District Attorney. The plan suggested by the District Attorney would not involve any extra expense to the Government over the present cost of the Revenue Marine Service in Alaskan waters; it only implies that Sitka be made head-quarters for the cutter which is sent every year from San Francisco for the protection of the seal fisheries and sea-otter grounds, and be given the additional duty of co-operating with the civil authorities in the way suggested. Under such an arrangement special terms of Court could be held at. Ounalaska and Kadiak during the annual cruize of the cutter, and the laws enforced over a large section of the Territory, to the people of which the Civil Government is at present a thing which exists in name only. A matter which, can so easily be arranged, and yet is of such vital importance to the proper and effective administration of the Civil Government, ought, it seems to me, to merit the prompt consideration and favourable action of the proper Departments. General Remarks and Suggestions. It must not be inferred from what I have said concerning the need of transportation facilities, which can only be supplied without large extra expense by means of a Revenue cutter stationed here at Sitka, that the presence of a war-vessel large enough to rate a marine guard can, or ought to be, dispensed with. A naval vessel, such as the " Pinta," or even one of the second or third rate, is Very essential as a.means of holding in peaceable subjection the native Settlements which have not yet yielded to civilizing influences, and to assist in restoring order in case of riot and armed resistance to the law on the part of a lawless element among the whites, such as 48 that which incited the recent expulsion of the Chinese from Douglas Island. There is no necessity, however, in my opinion, for keeping a marine guaid on shore here at Sitka, while there is an ever-present and prospective need for the presence of such a force at Juneau. Had the war-ship and her marine guard been there at the time, I have every reason to believe the expulsion of the Chinese would not have been attempted, or, if it had been, the commanding officer would certainly have been in a position, acting in unison with the civil authorities, to prevent the mob from consummating its unlawful purpose. The same lawless element that accomplished the forcible removal of the Chinese miners and labourers is likely at any time to demand the discharge of the natives who have been employed to fill the enforced vacancies, and in the absence of an armed force would be enabled to enforce their demand before any relief could be afforded from this point, where the only naval or military force in the Territory is now stationed—and where, I may truthfully add, its presence is not only unnecessary, but wholly useless. The native people here at Sitka are quiet and peaceable, and there is no lawless white element which cannot be held in complete subjection to the law without the aid or intervention of a military force. The only place in the Territory where there is any prospect of lawlessness beyond the control of the civil authorities is at Juneau, and I respectfully urge that the propriety of transferring the " Pinta | and her marine guard to that point be at once brought to the attention of the honourable Secretary of the Navy. If for any reason it is not deemed advisable to order the transfer I have suggested, then I venture the further suggestion that the marine guard now stationed here on shore at Sitka be transferred, if not to the ship where they properly belong, then into other quarters than those at present occupied by them in the building popularly known as the " Barracks." I submit herewith plans showing how and by whom the building is at present occupied, from which it will be seen that there is a juxtaposition of the civil and military altogether unseemly, if not wholly improper. The spectacle at the recent term of Court, when a number of British subjects were on trial, and every morning heard the beat of the drum, calling guard-mount on the portico, simultaneously with the loud proclamation of the crier announcing the opening of Court in the same building, was not one calculated to impress the strangers with an exalted opinion of our boasted free institutions. For appearance's sake, if for no other reason, this marine guard should be removed from this building in which the Courts are held, and the whole of which is needed for the accommodation of the Civil Government. But the truth is, this marine guard has no duty to perform here in Sitka, save that of guarding the few supplies necessary to its own subsistence. Prior to the institution of civil government the naval commander of the station was, to all intents and purposes, the executive officer of the Territory, and all vessels stationed here were of a rate which entitled them to a marine guard. One-half of this guard was sent ashore to perform police duty, the officer in command exercising the functions of a police magistrate. With a view to the coutinuance of this system, the | Pinta" was sent here and furnished with a marine guard of twenty-five men, under command of a Second Lieutenant, all of whom were sent ashore, the Commandant and privates performing the police duties mentioned from the date of her arrival, on the 17th August, 1884, till the 14th September following, when the newly-created Civil Government was inaugurated. Since that time the guard has had no local duties whatever to perform, and has practically been as useless as would be the fifth wheel to a waggon. In this view of the case, I submit if room occupied by it, and which is urgently required for the use of the Civil Government, ought not to be vacated, and the guard itself transferred to the only point in the Territory where an emergency requiring the services of an armed force is likely to arise. There are buildings at Juneau belonging to the Navy Department large enough for the accommodation of a force twice its size, and I respectfully urge that the Senior Officer be ordered to make the transfer without unnecessary delay. 49 No. 31. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 28.) Si ir, Downing Street, February 26, 1887. I AM directed by Secretary Sir H. Holland to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 14th instant, and to state that he concurs in the Marquis of Salisbury's proposal to defer, temporarily, presenting to the United States the claims to compensation advanced by the Government of Canada in respect of sailing-vessels recently seized in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 32. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 31.) My Lord, Washington, March 18, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copies of a letter addressed to the President by a firm in San Francisco, engaged in the seal fishery in Behring's Sea, complaining of the pretension of the Alaska Seal Company to exclusive jurisdiction over waters 3,000 miles long and 2,700 miles wide, and setting forth the grievances resulting therefrom. Allusion is made to the case of the American vessel "Ocean Spray," which went to the Island of St. Paul in 1876 and was seized for killing seals, and to the decision of the Judge of the Circuit Court of Oregon, to the effect that the vessel had not violated the Act of Congress. The Treasury Circular of 1872 is also cited as proving that American vessels had the right to enter Behring's Sea, from which the Company sought to exclude them. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 32. Extract from the "New York Herald" of March 17, 1887. (From our regular Correspondent.) I Herald " Bureau, Corner Fifteenth and G Streets, N.W., Washington, March 16, 1887. THE following letter, addressed to the President, has just been received:— " 32, Clay Street, San Francisco, California, | March 2, 1887. I To his Excellency Grover Cleveland, President of the United States: I Sir, " Some respectable business men of the Pacific coast, owners of American vessels, have recently been assailed through the columns of the public press in a semi-official manner as ' marauders ' and ' pirates' on the ocean, their property seized and forfeited, their business jeopardized, and their sea ventures utterly destroyed, without any reasonable or justifiable excuse or cause. "The pretended cause is, and it is so asserted, that they have violated section 1,956 of the Revised 'Statutes of the United States, which forbids the killing of fur-seals or fur- bearing animals 'within' the waters of Alaska Territory, ignoring the fact whether or not they were actually engaged in the killing of seals on the high seas or had made preparations so to do outside of the waters of Alaska Territory. On mere suspicion, they and their property have been remorselessly seized in the name of the United States by officials who have been engaged for the past many months in sounding the praises of the Alaska Commercial Company throughout the land, and adding to their usurpations by vilifying their victims. '"The time seems to have come when the great interests involved in the free and legitimate shipping ventures of the merchant marine of the nation demand that official [128] H |: 50 inquiry be made into the arbitrary conduct of Government officials in Behring's Sea, in connection with the usurpation of a Company at whose instance these arbitrary acts are committed. 1 This Company, one of the most stupendous organizations that ever existed in this country, and the peer of the East India and Hudson Bay Companies, was incorporated many years ago under the laws of the State of California as the Alaska Commercial Company. I Grabbing the Ocean. "It has taken possession of and assumed sovereign power over the most valuable fisheries of the whole United States, namely, the Alaska fisheries in Behring's Sea, and without shadow of right or authority, except a lease from the United States, dated the 3rd August, 1870, permitting it to kill 100,000 seals annually upon two small islands in Behring's Sea, at a rent of 55,000 dollars per annum, &c, has taken possession and control, not only of the Territory, but also of a vast sea 3,000 miles long by 2,700 miles wide, has made itself the Suzerain of the Government, and impressed into its service the officers and agents of the Government to maintain its possession and control of this immense territory and sea. "Alexander the Great was not a robber, although he absorbed kingdoms, and the Alaska Commercial Company is not a ' pirate,' although it has absorbed Alaska and an ocean. " It has established exclusive trading posts at all the available stations in that immense territory, on the coast, along the rivers, and upon the islands of Behring's Sea. It exercises absolute dominion over the natives, and holds them in a state of practical bondage. It has exterminated the seals on certain islands to prevent them from falling into the hands of other traders. Its agents have, in violation of law, defaced the silver coin of the United States with a stamp for purposes of trade, and refuse to accept any other when tendered by the natives for the purchase of the necessaries of life. It has extended its dominion into Russian territory to the restriction and detriment of trade upon the whole of Behring's Sea north of latitude 53°, and by an extension of jurisdiction, unknown to modern law, has procured the seizure of vessels fishing in Russian waters, upon the assumption of encroachment upon its privileges granted by the United States under the lease to fish on the Islands of St. Paul and St. Georsre in Alaska. 1 Crimes against the Nation. 1 It has designedly violated the conditions of its lease by the failure to take oil from the carcasses of the seals killed, to the damage and loss to the Government of hundreds of thousands of dollars, by throwing away millions of carcasses of seals without extracting the oil, the lease having been obtained upon an agreement to pay the Government '55 cents per gallon for oil obtained from said seals' killed by it on the leased islands. Its agents use the United States' Revenue cutters as a means of transportation, for private benefit; consult with and influence their officers, to the detriment of American vessels in the waters of Behring's Sea; it aids and abets the Indians of Ounalaska to kill by shooting from the shore, contrary to law, young seals and cows ; obtains the skins and sells the salted carcasses back to the Indians; it refuses to aid American vessels in distress, by refusing to sell them provisions; it has for its paid agents officers or employes of the Government whose duty to the Government is overshadowed by the instructions of and for the benefit of the Company ; it sells to the natives at high prices large quantities of condemned and worthless tobacco in violation of the internal revenue laws ; it employs and pays attorneys to prosecute Government cases where American citizens are falsely and unjustly, accused of crime, and, in order to maintain its supremacy over Alaska and the whole of Behring's Sea, it now seeks, by infamous prosecutions, to prevent American citizens from even traversing and fishing upon the high seas, under the absurd pretence that the waters of the whole of Behring's Sea are adjacent to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, and claims to be molested and disturbed in their lease of said islands by fishing-vessels hundreds of miles away and beyond the boundaries of the United States. "Monstrous Claims. "This Company claims that the waters of Behring's Sea are within the limits of Alaska, and procures the seizure, through subservient Government officers, of every vessel that dares to traverse those waters, or is found anywhere therein on a seal-hunting voyage. 51 "It is immaterial to it whether vessels are found in the actual killing of seals or ;where the seals-have been killed ; the mere presence of the vessels in Behring's Sea seems sufficient evidence to justify their seizure in any part of those waters. " In the case of the ' Ocean Spray,' which went to the Island of St. Paul in 1876, the very stronghold of this Company, provided with all the appliances for killing seals and -was seized, Judge Deady, of the United States' District Court of Oregon, a man of unquestionable learning and of high judicial and personal character, held (in 4 Saw., 105) that all these preparations, even if an intent could be shown, were not a violation of the Act of Congress. This is the only reported adjudicated case, and the strongest the Company could have. " This vessel deliberately proceeded to, and landed its crew at, the Island of St. Paul, yet the Court held that there was no offence ; and when we consider that our vessel has been seized going to and returning from Russian waters, hundreds of miles distant from St. Paul and St. George Islands, and forfeited, and its master and crew imprisoned, we are left to conjecture that the waters adjacent to the leased islands might be stretched to include the whole of the Pacific and Atlantic Oceans, and that the power and rule of this Company extends from these islands to the city of Washington. "As early as 1872 the Company appealed to the Government to have a Revenue cutter stationed at Ounimak Pass, in the Aleutian group, the only safe entrance to Behring's Sea, to prevent American vessels from passing into that sea ; but the Secretary of the Treasury, the Hon. George S. Boutwell, refused, upon the legal ground that vessels had a right to go there if they did not kill seals within a marine league of the shore. " The Act of Congress contemplates this well-established doctrine when it restricts the killing of seals to the 'waters of Alaska Territory' (section 1956, Revised Statutes), and further declares, in sections 1961 and 1967, that it is not a crime to kill seals in Behring's Sea unless ' in the waters adjacent to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George/ 'Adjacent' means 'lying near, close, or contiguous,' and the waters within the marine league of the decisions are the only | adjacent waters ' there are. But, according to this Company and the officers of the Government, it means a stretch of ocean 3,000 miles long and 2,700 wide; and under this theory of ' adjacency' the term ' pirates' includes all fishing-vessels found in that sea. " Therr- xiever has been a seizure within the waters adjacent to these islands, or of Alaska Territory, except the 'Ocean Spray,' and that vessel was released. " International Rights ignored. " Behring's Sea is the international highway to the Arctic Ocean, and not the private property of the Alaska Commercial Company, nor of the Government of the United States, and the Government could not concede to the Alaska Commercial Company any greater territorial right.than it possessed itself, and that territorial right and jurisdiction ceases and ends at the ' marine league' of international law from the shore. Beyond this limit the ocean is the common property of the whole world, and every animal and fish in it is fierce naturae, and belongs to him who takes it. "This is the doctrine which has come down to us from antiquity and has been observed by all people, whether civilized or barbarous, except this Company and Government officials of the United States. " A shipper or vessel-owner of the Pacific coast is in no condition to resist the power of an oppressor when his vessel is seized and beached upon an inhospitable and lawless shore, his cargo scattered to the four winds of heaven, and his crew imprisoned in an inaccessible port. The only additional requisite to make this system all-powerful seems to be the annexing of Siberia to the lease, and the transporting of these so-called pirates to its penal mines. The same theory of' adjacency ' would certainly apply. "Through this policy of Government officers permitting this Company to extend its powers under the lease, the Government .will surely lose in the end perhaps the greatest and most profitable industry in the world, namely, the seal fisheries of Alaska. "The fishery question now agitating the New England States, and the interests involved there, are a mere bagatelle to those of the Alaska fisheries. " It is charged that our American fishermen are exterminating the seals in Behring's Sea, and they> have 'piratically,' during the season of 1886, captured 200,000 seals in excess of the number authorized to be taken by the Alaska Commercial Company at the islands. This is the statement in a letter to a San Francisco paper, dated the 20th February, 1887, of Lieutenant J. C. Cantwell, an officer employed in the United States' Revenue Service, stationed in Alaskan waters. But this is contradicted by the records of our Courts, which show that only 577 fur-seal skins were seized on American vessels last [128] H 2 52 season, and proof- was offered, but not admitted, that these were caught in the Pacific Ocean ; and M. Phillipens, the Russian agent of the Alaska Commercial Company, in his Report of the catch of that Company for the season of 1886, states that the Company killed 202,000 fur-seals in the waters of Behring's Sea. So that, on the testimony of the Company itself, these so-called 1 piratical' American fishermen are not engaged in the work of extermination to any serious extent, but this Company is engaged in that work. The same Lieutenant Cantwell, who is an ardent (but incoherent) writer, in the same communication, states that not one-half the number of seals are killed that should be, because they are increasing so rapidly ; and we feel just cause of complaint that American fishermen are arrested and their property confiscated for doing that which the Alaska Commercial Company is permitted to do in violation of a lease which restricts its catch to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George. " Court Decisions disregarded. I Under the decisions of our Courts, and the opinion of the Treasury Department, as given in 1872, every citizen has a right to fish for fur-seals in the waters of Behring's Sea when distant a full marine league from the .shore. " But these decisions and former rulings of the Treasury Department are disregarded, and no one except this Company is permitted to kill seals anywhere in Behring's Sea. "At a time when Congress is making an effort to protect the fisheries of the Atlantic coast, the officers of the Government on the Pacific coast, with singular inconsistency, are destroying and preying upon the commerce of its own citizens. | it is to be hoped that this mistaken policy of the Government officials will be changed upon investigation of their conduct and that of the lessees of the Government, and that the great injury heretofore committed, and about to be repeated, upon our fishing-vessels by them, will be prevented. " We make this statement because we have been despoiled of our property. One of our vessels, the ' San Diego,' seized and taken to Sitka and condemned, her cargo of seal-skins, taken in the open sea, left in the care of the Alaska Commercial Company's warehouse at an island in mid-ocean; the voyage of another schooner, the 'Sierra,' broken up and destroyed \ because our efforts to procure the signature of the Judge of the District Court of Alaska to a summary statement of the facts of the cases, for transmission to the Secretary of the Treasury, for a remission of the forfeiture, have been disregarded and ignored at the instigation of the Company, whose own attorney acted as special counsel for the Government in procuring said forfeiture; because our Petition and requests to the Secretary of the Treasury, made months ago for relief, and to bring said property within reach of a civilized community, to prevent its utter destruction by rot and decay, remain unnoticed and unanswered; because it is understood that large appropriations are about to be made for the purpose of enabling Revenue cruizers to continue their policy of preying upon American commerce in Behring's Sea, and guarding those waters as a closed sea. And it is respectfully suggested that the subject-matter be submitted to the Law Officers of the Government, that instructions may be issued and published by the Treasury Department to Revenue Marine officers, to guide them in the proper execution of the laws relating to Alaskan waters, so that all persons engaged in seal fishing may understand their rights in this branch of our domestic commerce. " Impressed with the belief that we have exhausted our efforts to obtain either a hearing or redress is our apology for appealing to the Chief Executive of the nation. " With great respect, yours, &c. (Signed) " L. N. Handy and Co." . No. 33. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 2.) Sir, Downing Street, April 2, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Secretary Sir H. Holland to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada inquiring whether owners of vessels now fitting out for this year's trip to Behring's Sea may depend upon being unmolested by United States' cruizers when not near land. I am to request that inquiry may be made of the United States' Government on this 53 d of the answer which Lord Salisbury point, and that Sir H. Holland may be- in for meet desires should be returned to the Governor-General. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 33. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. (Telegraphic.) March 31, 1S87. OWNERS of vessels now fitting out for this year's trip to Behring's Sea inquire whether they may depend upon being unmolested by United States' cruizers when not near land. Please telegraph reply. No. 34. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, April 2, 1887. I HAVE to request that you will inquire of the United States' Government whether the owners of vessels at present fitting out for this year's trip to Behring's Sea ma)' depend upon not being molested by United States' cruizers when not near the land. You will be good enough to inform rae on this subject by telegraph. I have further to instruct you to ascertain from the United States' Government whether they have received the documents connected with the seizure of British vessels last autumn in Behring's Sea, which were referred to in your despatch of the 4th February last. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 35. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 11.) My Lord, Washington, March 29, 1887. I HAVE the honour to report to your Lordship that the United States' steam-ship "Thetis " has sailed from New York, and will proceed round Cape Horn and up the west coast to Alaska. It is reported that the Secretary of the Treasury has received a letter from the Alaska Commercial Company, complaining that private parties are taking seals in the waters about Alaska, and' asking for more Revenue cutters to be sent for their protection. The Company further ask that the United States' Government should prohibit all killing of seals within the eastern half of Behring's Sea, or from a point beginning at Behring's Straits, and passing from the north-west end of St. Lawrence Island in a south-easterly direction to the Island of Attou, at the extreme westerly point of the Aleutian Archipelago. I have &c (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 36. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 11.) My Lord, Washington, April 2, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform your Lordship that the Commander of the United States' Revenue cutter " Gallatin " has been cited to appear before the Admiralty Court in the Boston district to answer to the allegation that in June last, while in command of the United States' steamer " Corwin," he took by force from the American schooner " Sierra 1 her arms and ammunition, at a point in the open sea 30 miles north of Ounalaska, while she was navigating- the waters of the North Pacific Ocean on a hunting and fishing expedition, thus breaking up her voyage, to the damage of the plaintiffs of 22,500 dollars. I have instructed Her Majesty's Consul at Boston to watch this case, and report the decision of the Court. I have, &c, (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. 54 No. 37. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, April 13.) My Lord, Washington, April 13, 1887. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of the 2nd instant, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I addressed to the Secretary of State, as well as a copy of the reply thereto, stating that the records of the judicial proceedings in the cases of the British vessels seized in Behring's Sea were received at the State Department on Saturday last, and are now under examination, and that the remoteness of the scene of the fur-seal fisheries has delayed the Treasury officials in framing appropriate Regulations and issuing orders to the United States' police vessels- which information I had the honour to telegraph to your Lordship this day. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No. 37. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, April 4, 1887. IN view of the approaching fishing season in Behring's Sea, and the fitting out of vessels for fishing operations in those waters, Her Majesty's Government have requested me to inquire whether the owners of such vessels may rely on being unmolested by the cruizers of the United States when not near land. Her Majesty's Government are also desirous to know whether the documents referred to in your note of the 3rd February last, connected with the seizure of certain British vessels beyond the 3-mile limit, and legal proceedings connected therewith, have been received, and I have the honour, therefore, to request you to be good enough to enable me to reply to these inquiries on the part of Her Majesty's Government with as little delay as possible. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 2 in No. 37. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, April 12, 1887. 1 HAVE the honour to acknowledge your note of the 4th instant, relative to the fisheries in Behring's Sea, and inquiring whether the documents referred to in my note of the 3rd February, relating to the cases of seizure in those waters of vessels charged with violating the laws of the United States regulating the killing of fur-seals, had been received. The records of the judicial proceedings in the cases in the District Court in Alaska referred to were only received at this Department on Saturday last, and are now under examination. The remoteness of the scene of the fur-seal fisheries, and the special peculiarities of that industry, have unavoidably delayed the Treasury officials in framing appropriate Regulations, and issuing orders to United States' vessels to police the Alaskan waters for the protection of the fur-seals from indiscriminate slaughter, and consequent speedy extermination. The laws of the United States in this behalf are contained in the Revised Statutes relating to Alaska in sections 1956-1971, and have been in force for upwards of seventeen years, and prior to the seizures of last summer but a single infraction is known to have occurred, and that was promptly punished. The question of instructions to Government vessels in regard to preventing the indiscriminate killing of fur-seals 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 themselves accordingly. 'S;ij|j I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. 55 Annex. Charter III. Provisions relating to the Unorganized Territory of Alaska. Section. 1954. Customs, &c, Laws extended to Alaska. 1955. Importation of Fire-arms and Distilled Spirits may be prohibited. 1956. Killing of Fur-bearing Animals prohibited. 1957. What Courts to have jurisdiction of offences. 1958. Remission of Fines, &c. 1959. Saint Paul and Saint George Islands declared Special Reservations, 1960. Killing of Seal upon them prohibited except in certain months. 1961. Killing.of certain Seal prohibited. 1962. Limit to number of Seals to be killed. 1963. Right to take Seal may be leased. 1964. Bond. 1965. Who may lease. 1966. Covenants in Lease. 1967. Penalty. 1968. Penalty upon Leases. 1969. Tax upon Seal-skins. 1970. Lease may be terminated. 1971. Lessees to furnish Copies to Masters of their Vessels. 1972. Certain Sections may be altered. 1973. Agents and Assistants to manage Seal Fisheries. 1974. Their pay, &c. 1975. Not to be interested in right to take Seals. 1976. Agents may administer certain Oaths and take Testimony. Sec. 1954. The laws of the United States relating to customs, commerce, and navigation are extended to and over all the main-land, islands, and waters of the territory ceded to the United States by the Emperor of Russia by.Treaty concluded at Washington on the 30th day of March, a.d. 1867, so far as the same may be applicable thereto. Sec. 1955. The President shall have power to restrict and regulate or to prohibit the importation and use of fire-arms, ammunition, and distilled spirits into and within the Territory of Alaska. The exportation of the same from any other port or place in the United States, when destined to any port or place in that Territory, and all such arms, ammunition, and distilled spirits, exported or attempted to be exported from any port or place in the United States and destined for such Territory, in violation of any regulations that may be prescribed under this section, and all such arms, ammunition, and distilled spirits landed or attempted to be landed or used at any port or place in the Territory, in violation of such regulations, shall be forfeited; and if the value of the same exceeds 400 dollars the vessel upon which the same is found, or from which they have been landed, together with her tackle, apparel, and furniture and cargo, shall be forfeited; and any person wilfully violating such regulations shall be fined not more than 500 dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months. Bonds may be required for a faithful observance of such regulations from the master or owners of any vessel departing from any port in the United States having on board fire-arms, ammunition, or distilled spirits, when such vessel is destined to any place in the Territory, or if not so destined, when there is reasonable ground of suspicion that such articles are intended to be landed therein in violation of law; and similar bonds may also be required on the landing of any- such articles in the Territory from the person to whom the same may be consigned. Sec. 1956. No person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof; and every person guilty thereof shall, for each offence, be fined not less than 200 nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited ; but the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable, or other fur-bearing animal, except fur-seals, under such regulations as he may prescribe; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary to prevent the killing of any fur-seal, and to provide for the execution of the provisions of this section Customs, &c, Laws extended to Alaska. 27 July, 1868, c. 278, s 1, v. 15, p. 240. Importation and use of fire-arms and distilled spirits may be prohibited. 27 July, 1868, c. 273, s. 4, v. 15, p. 241. Killing of fur-bearing animals prohibited. 27 July, 1868, c. 273, s.6, v. 15, p. 246. What Courts have jurisdiction of offences. 27 July, 1868, c 273, s. 7, v. 15, p. 241. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, s. 7, v. 16, p. 18>. Remission of fines, &c. 27 July, 1868, c. 273, s. 8, t. 15, p. 24?. Saint Paul and Saint George Islands declared special reservations. 3 Mar., 1869, Kes. No. 22, v. 15, p. 348. Killing of seal upon them prohibited except in certain months. 1 July, 1870, c. 18 s. 1, t. 16, p. 180. Killing of certain seal prohibited. 1 July, 1870, c. 189. s. 2, v. 16, p. 180. Limit to number of seals to be killed. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, s. 3, v. 86, p. 180. until it is otherwise provided by law ; nor shall he grant any special privileges under this seetion. Sec. 1957. Until otherwise provided by law, all violations of this chapter, and of the several laws hereby extended to the Territory of Alaska and the waters thereof, committed within limits of the same, shall be prosecuted in any District Court of the United States in California or Oregon, or in the District Courts of Washington; and the Collector and Deputy Collectors appointed for Alaska Territory, and any person authorized in writing by either of them, or by the Secretary of the Treasury, shall have power to arrest persons and seize vessels and merchandize liable to fines, penalties, or forfeitures under this and the other laws extended over the Territory, and to keep and deliver the same to the Marshal of some one of such Courts; and such Courts shall have original jurisdiction, and may take cognizance of all cases arising under this Act and the several laws hereby extended over the Territory, and shall proceed therein in the same manner and with the like effect as if such cases had arisen within the District or Territory where the proceedings are brought. Sec. 1958. In all cases of fine, penalty, or forfeiture embraced in the Act approved the 3rd March, 1797, ch. 13, or mentioned in any Act in addition to or amendatory of such Act, that have occurred or may occur in the collection district of Alaska, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized, if in his opinion the fine, penalty, or forfeiture was incurred without wilful negligence or intention of fraud, to ascertain the facts in such manner and under such regulations as he may deem proper without regard to the provisions of the Act above referred to, and upon the facts so to be ascertained, he may exercise all the power of remission conferred upon him by that Act, as fully as he might have done iiad such facts been ascertained under and according to the provisions of that Act. Sec. 1959. The Islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, in Alaska, are declared a special reservation for Government purposes; and until otherwise provided by law it shall be unlawful for any person to land or remain on either of those islands, except by the authority of the Secretary of the Treasury; and any person found on either of those islands contrary to the provisions hereof shall be summarily removed; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary of War to carry this section into effect. Sec. 1960. It shall be unlawful to kill any fur-seal upon the Islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or in the waters adjacent thereto, except during the months of June, July, September, and October in each year; and it shall be unlawful to kill such seals at any time by the use of fire-arms, or by other means tending to drive the seals away from those islands; but the natives of the islands shall have the privilege of killing such young seals as may be necessary for their own food and clothing during other months, and also such old seals as may be required for their own clothing, and for the manufacture of boats for their own use ; and the killing in such cases shall be limited and controlled by such regulations as maybe prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. Sec. 1961. It shall be unlawful to kill any female seal, or any seal less than one year old, at any season of the year, except as above provided ; and it shall also be unlawful to kill any seal in the waters adjacent to the Islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain ; and every person who violates the provisions of this or the preceding section shall be punished for each offence by a fine of not not less than 200 dollars, nor more than 1,000 dollars, or by imprisonment not more than six months, or by both such fine and imprisonment; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, and furniture, whose crews are found engaged in the violation of either this or the preceding section, shall be forfeited to the United States. See. 1962. For the period of twenty years from the 1st July, 1870, the number of fur-seals which may be killed for their skins upon the Island of Saint Paul is limited to 75,000 per annum; and the number of fur-seals which may be killed for their skins upon the Island of Saint George is limited to 25,000 per annum; but the Secretary of the Treasury may limit the right of killing, if it becomes necessary for the preservation of such seals, with such proportionate reduction of the rents reserved to the Government as may be proper ; and every person who knowingly violates either of the provisions of this section shall be punished as provided in the preceding section. 57 1963. When the lease heretofore made by the Secretary of the to "The Alaska Commercial Company," of the right to engage in Right to take seal may be leased. 1 July. 1870, c. 189, sb. 4, 5, and 6, v. 16, pp. 180, 181. Bond. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, 8. 4, v. 18, p. 180. 1 July, 1870, c. 18( a. 6, v. 16, p. 181. Sec. 1 ILclSlll V W AUV i»;lioivu WUiUIVIVXUX \>UUll^UllJ j \J I. UUV ii_iiv W vuqU- taking fur-seals on the Islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, pursuant to the Act of the 1st July, chapter 189, or when any future similar lease expires, or is surrendered, forfeited, or terminated, the Secretary shall lease to proper arid responsible parties, for the best advantage of the United States, having due regard to the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants,' their comfort, maintenance, and education, as well as to the interests of the parties heretofore engaged in trade and the protection of the fisheries, the right of taking fur-seals on the islands herein named, and of sending a vessel or vessels to the islands for the skins of such seals, for the term of twenty years, at an annual rental of not less than 50,000 dollars, to be reserved in such lease and secured by a deposit of United States' bonds to that amount; and every such lease shall be duly executed in duplicate, and shall not be transferable. Sec. 1964. The Secretary of the Treasury shall take from the lessees of such islands in all cases a bond, with securities, in a sum not less than 500,000 dollars, conditioned for the faithful observance of all the laws and requirements of Congress, and the Regulations of the Secretary of the Treasury, touching the taking of fur-seals and the disposing of the same, and for the payment of all taxes and dues accruing to the United States connected therewith. Sec. 1965. No persons other than American citizens shall be permitted, by who may lease, lease or otherwise, to occupy the Islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, or either of them, for the purpose of taking the skins of fur-seals therefrom, nor shall any foreign vessels be engaged in taking such skins; and the Secretary of the Treasury shall vacate and declare any lease forfeited if the same be held or operated for the use, benefit, or advantage, directly or indirectly, of any persons other than American citizens. Sec. 1966. Every lease shall contain a covenant on the part of the lessee Covenants in lease, that he will not keep, sell, furnish, give, or dispose of any distilled spirits or spirituous liquors on either of those islands to any of the natives thereof, such person not being a physician and furnishing the same for use as medicine; and every Revenue officer, officially acting as such, on either of the islands, shall seize and destroy any distilled or spirituous liquors found thereon; but such officer shall make detailed Reports of his doings in that matter to the Collector of the port. Sec. 1967. Every person who kills any fur-seal on either of those islands, Penalty or in the waters adjacent thereto, without authority of the lessees thereof, and every person who molests, disturbs, or interferes with the lessees, or either of them, or their agents or employe's, in the lawful prosecution of their business, under the provisions of this chapter, shall for each offence be punished as prescribed in section 1961; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, appurtenances, and cargo, who crews are found engaged in any violation of the provisions of sections 1965 to 1968, inclusive, shall be forfeited to the United States. Sec. 1968. If any person or Company, under any lease herein authorized, Penalty upon lessees knowingly kills, or permits to be killed, any number of seals exceeding the number for each island in this chapter prescribed, such person or Company shall, in addition to the penalties and forfeitures herein provided, forfeit the whole number of the skins of seals killed in that year, or, in case the same have been disposed of, then such person or Company shall forfeit the value of the same. Sec. 1969. In addition to the annual rental required to be reserved in every Tax npon seai-skina. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, a. 5, v. 16, p. 181. 1 July, 1870, c. 189. s. 6, v. 16, p. 181. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, s. 5, v. 16, p. 181. lease, as provided in section 1963, a revenue tax or duty of 2 dollars is laid upon each fur-seal skin taken and shipped from the Islands of Saint Paul and Saint George, during the continuance of any lease, to be paid into the Treasury of the United States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is empowered to make all needful regulations for the collection and payment of the same, and to secure the comfort, maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of those islands, and also to carry into full effect all the provisions of this chapter except as otherwise prescribed. Sec. 1970. The Secretary of the Treasury may terminate any lease given to any person, Company, or Corporation on full and satisfactory proof of the violation of any of the provisions of this chapter or the regulations established by him. [128] I 1 July, 1870, c. 189, s. 6, v. 18, p. 181. Lease may be terminated. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, a. 6, v. 16, p. 182. Lessees to furnish copies to masters of their vessels. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, s. 4, v. 16, p. 180. Certain sections may be altered. 1 July, 1870, c. 189, s. 8, v. 16, p. 182. Agents and assistants to manage seal fisheries. 5 March, 1872, c. 31, s. 1, v. 17, p. 35. Their pay, &c. 5 Marchi 1872, c. 81, s. 1, v. 17, p. 35. Sot to be interested in right to take seals. 5 March, 1872, c. 31, s. 1, v. 17, p. 35. Agents may administer certain oaths and take testimony. 5 March, 1872, c. 31, s. 3, v. 17, p. 35. 58 Sec. 1971. The lessees shall furnish to the several masters of vessels employed by them certified copies of the lease held by them respectively, which shall be presented to the Government Revenue officer for the time being who may be in charge at the islands as the authority of the party for landing and taking skins. Sec. 1972. Congress may at any time hereafter alter, amend, or repeal sections from 1960 to 1971, both inclusive, of this chapter. Sec. 1973. The Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to appoint one Agent and three Assistant Agents, who shall be charged with the management of the seal fisheries in Alaska, and the performance of such other duties as may be assigned to them by the Secretary of the Treasury. Sec. 1974. The Agent shall receive the sum of 10 dollars each day, one Assistant Agent the sum of 8 dollars each day, and two Assistant Agents the sum of 6 dollars each day while so employed; and they shall also be allowed their necessary travelling expenses in going to and returning from Alaska, for which expenses vouchers shall be presented to the proper accounting officecs of the Treasury, and such expenses shall not exceed in the aggregate 600 dollars each in any one year. Sec. 1975. Such Agents Shall never be interested, directly or indireotly, in any lease of the right to take seals, nor in any proceeds or profits .thereof^ either as owner, agent, partner, or otherwise. Sec. 1976. Such Agents are empowered to administer oaths in all cases relating to the service of the United States, and to take testimony in Alaska for the use of the Government in any matter concerning the public revenues. No. 38. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 17.) My Lord, Washington, May 6, 18S7. WITH reference to my despatch of the 2nd April last, I have the honour to inform your Lordship that the case of the owners of the American ships seized for sealing in Behring Sea against the Captain of the United States' cruizer " Corwin" has been postponed until the Government is prepared for the defences. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. : No. 39. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 10.) My Lord, Washington, May 30, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith a statement which has appeared in the New York "Times," showing that the United States' Government persistently combated the pretension of Russia to absolute dominion over the Kamschatkan and Behring Seas previous to the cession of Alaska. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKYILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 39. Extract from the New York " Times" of May 29, 1887. Not a Landlocked Sea.—Release oe the Beitish Sealers justified.— The - so-called controversy with respect to the Alaskan seal fisheries and American rights to exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of Behring Sea has recently been made the subject of more misrepresentation to the square inch than almost any other pending 59 topic of public discussion. It has been represented that an elaborate Conference on this question is now in progress between the State Department and the British Minister- in Washington. Mr. Frederick W. Seward appears to have imbibed this impression, and has suggested several profound conundrums to be proposed by Secretary Bayard to the British. Minister in the progress of the controversy. There is no Conference in progress on this matter. When the President, for reasons satisfactory to himself, ordered the release of tne British sealing vessels captured by an American Revenue cutter more than 3 miles from shore in Behring Sea that action had the effect of a pardon, and closed all discussion as to the legality of the captures. But there are some historical facts in connection with the question which will probably suggest an exceedingly strong inference. Mr. Henry W. Elliott, of the Smithsonian Institution, who is stated to have passed several seasons in the islands of the Behring Sea, and to be one of the best-informed men in the United States on the subject of jurisdiction over the waters of that " landlocked sea," as he calls it, has recently contributed to the prevailing wrong impressions two important statements, which are in direct conflict with official records easily accessible. This,.whole question has so important a bearing upon our present controversy with Great Britain on the subject of the Canadian fisheries and the right claimed by our Canadian neighbours to hamper the deep-sea fisheries of the United States that it is worthy of close examination. Mr. Elliott takes substantially this position :— 1. That when the Emperor of Russia, by. the Ukase of 1821, declared the absolute dominion of the Russian Crown over all Russian American territory and seas and, bays, including the Kamschatkan or Behring Sea, no protest was made against this assertion of authority by Russia, and none has ever been made since by any civilized Power until last year. 2. That the claim made by the United States about this period related to the North Pacific Ocean only, and that the United States never, in all the correspondence between the years 1822 and 1824, made the slightest reference to or asked for any rights or privileges in the Behring Sea. What are the facts ? A translation of the Ukase of 1821 is published in " British and Foreign State Papers," vol. ix, p. 472. It] distinctly sets out that i the pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishery, and of. all other industry on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Behring Strait (the northern boundary of Behring Sea) to the 51st degree of northern latitude, also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands, from Behring Strait to the south cape of the Island of Urup, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects," and foreign vessels are interdicted from approaching within 100 Italian miles of the coasts and islands named under penalty of confiscation. Having this Ukase before him, John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State, on the 25th February, 1822, wrote to M. Poletica, the Russian Minister, as follows (the letter is printed in the same volume of State Papers, p. 483) : 11 am directed by the President of the United States to inform you that he has seen with surprise in this Edict the assertion of a territorial claim on the part of Russia, extending to the 51st degree of north latitude on this continent, and a Regulation interdicting to all commercial vessels other than Russian, upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation, the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores to which the claim is made to apply." Mr. Adams adds:." To exclude the vessels of our citizens from the shores beyond the ordinary distance to which the territorial jurisdiction extends has excited still greater suigwjffle," and he closes by asking an explanation. M. Poletica replied, on the 28th February, 1822 (p. 487) : " The Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend on the north-west coast of America from Behring Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude and on the opposite side of Asia to the islands adjacent from the same strait to the 45th degree. The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limit comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas ('mers fermees'), and the Russian Government might consequently judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and., especially that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners. But it preferred only asserting its essential rights without taking any advantage of localities." It is interesting to look at the Map and see what the Russian claim really was. Latitude north 51° takes in the southern boundary of the Aleutian Islands to the Sea of Okhotsk. Mr. Adams, in his reply to M. Poletica (same volume, p. 488), says: " With regard to the suggestion that the Russian Government might have justified the exercise of sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea because it claims territory both on the American and Asiatic shores, it may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea in latitude 51° north is not less than 90° of longitude, [128] I 2 60 or 4,000 miles." He ends by saying the President is persuaded the citizens of the United States will remain unmolested in their lawful commerce, and that no effect will he given to an interdiction manifestly incompatible with their rights. This controversy was ended between the United States and Russia by a Convention signed at St. Peters- burgh on the 17th April, 1824, in which it was agreed that in no part of the great ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, should the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers be disturbed or restrained, either in navigation or fishing, or resorting to the coast for the purpose of trading with the natives. Great Britain concluded a similar Treaty in 1825. This Treaty of 1824 remained substantially in force until the cession of Alaska to the United States by Russia. The claim that Behring Sea is a " landlocked sea" with a " firm line pelagic boundary," advanced by Mr. Elliott, is manifestly absurd, in view of the fact that it is about 900 miles from the Aleutian Islands to the Asiatic coast of Russia. But, even assuming that it could have been treated as a land-locked sea at the time of the Ukase of 1821 by virtue of the possession by one Power of land on both sides, that condition ceased when Russia parted with her territory on one side, just as Great Britain was obliged to abandon her claim to territorial jurisdiction over the Bay of Fundy because the United States owned simply a headland on the other side from her possessions. The Sea of Okhotsk is one of the seas distinctly referred to in the Ukase of 1821, which called out Adams' protest. Up to 1868, when Russia sold the Kurile Islands to Japan, this was practically a "land-locked sea, having a firm pelagic boundary," as erroneously claimed by Mr. Elliott in regard to the Behring Sea. Yet in "Diplomatic Correspondence," 1868, p. 462, there is a letter addressed by Secretary of State William H. Seward to Cassius M. Clay, our Minister to Russia, dated the 23rd December, 1867, in which Mr. Seward informed Mr. Clay that much anxiety had been created in the United States by the report that a Russian armed steamer had ordered American whaling-vessels away from the shore near Okhotsk City, in the Sea of Okhotsk, and had fired upon the ship's boat of the bark " Endeavour" of New Bedford. Mr. Seward instructed our Minister to inquire what foundation there was for this report, and what instructions had been given by the Russian Government to authorize this action. At first the Acting Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs contented himself with claiming, not that the Sea of Okhotsk was a closed sea, but raising the same question of the 3-mile line which now forms so prominent a feature in our Canadian fishery troubles, and saying that by the laws in force the American vessel had been properly warned off, she being within that distance. (This letter is published in "Diplomatic Correspondence," 1868, p. 467.) Subsequently, in reply to another remonstrance from Mr. Seward, stating that American whalers had been whaling in those bays unobstructed for seventeen years, M. Stoeckl, Russian Ambassador, transmits to Mr. Seward (same volume, p. 485) a copy of a Report from the Russian Minister of Marine, in which he admitted that there could not be found in the Department of Marine any trace of instructions given to Russian cruizers to take any restrictive measures touching the whaling fisheries in the Sea of Okhotsk. This ended the controversy With regard to that sea, which at this time was . much more entitled to be considered an inland sea than the Behring Sea. One illustration of still later date maybe given. In "Foreign Relations," 1882, p. 447, there is a letter from Secretary of State Frelinghuysen to Mr. Hoffman, our Charge- d'Affaires at St. Petersburgh, conveying a complaint of a San Francisco firm of restrictions put by the Governor of Eastern Siberia on American fishermen in the Okhotsk and Behring Seas. This was after the cession of Alaska to the United States. Mr. Hoffman (p. 452) transmits a note from M. de Giers, from which it clearly appears that the Russian Government made no pretence of treating either of those seas as closed seas. The entire fabric of the attempted censure of the State Department for failure to maintain American interests in the Behring Sea is thus thrown to the ground. It is shown that, so far from acknowledging Behring Sea to be a closed sea, the United States has placed itself on record as vigorously opposing any such assumption, not only with regard to Behring Sea, where there was a distance of 900 miles from shore to shore, but also in regard to the Sea of Okhotsk, which might perhaps have been properly regarded as a land-locked sea. In view of these historical facts, and of the important bearing which the maintenance of this doctrine of free, untrammelled rights of commerce, navigation, and fishing on the open sea, which the United States is now engaged in maintaining in other quarters where the national interests involved are immeasurably greater, if requires no spirit of prophecy to divine that the Revenue cutters "Bear" and "Rush," 61 which have been ordered by the Treasury Department from San Francisco to the Behring Sea, have probably been ordered not to repeat the mistake of capturing foreign sealers unless detected flagrante delicto within the unquestioned maritime jurisdiction of the United States, namely, 3 miles from shore. Washington, May 28, 1887. No. 40. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received June 28.) Sir, Downing Street, June 27, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of Canadian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Secretary Sir Henry Holland to transmit to you, for such action in the matter as the Marquis of Salisbury may think proper to take, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, inclosing copy of an approved Report of the Privy Council respecting the action of the United States' authorities towards British subjects in these cases, and urging that full reparation may be demanded from the United States' Government. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRA.MSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 40. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, Government House, Toronto, May 21, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence on the subject of the seizure of Canadian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, concurring in a Report of my Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and recommending that the attention of Her Majesty's Government be called to the grave injustice done by the United States' authorities to British subjects peaceably pursuing their lawful occupations on the high seas, to the delay which has taken place in inquiring into and redressing wrongs committed, to the severe, inhospitable, and unjustifiable treatment of the officers and crews of the vessels seized, and to the serious loss inflicted upon owners of the same, in order that full and speedy reparation may be made by the United States' Government. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 40. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the \6th May, 1887. submitting the ON a Report dated the 9th May, 1887, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, following resume of facts, with a reference to the Canadian sealing schooners " Carolina," " Onward," and "Thornton," seized by the United States' Revenue cutter "Corwin," in Behring's Sea in the year 1886. The above-named vessels fitted out at Victoria, British Columbia, for seal hunting in the waters of the Pacific Ocean, adjacent to Queen Victoria Islands, Queen Charlotte Islands, and Alaska. At the time of seizure (1st and 2nd August, 1886) they were at a distance of more than 60 miles from the nearest land. They were taken possession of by the United States' cutter, and towed to the port of Oonalaska, where they were detained. The crews of the "Carolina" and "Thornton," with the exception of the captain and one man detained at Oonalaska, were sent by steamer to San Francisco, and there turned adrift, while the crew of the "Onward" was kept at Oonalaska. At the time of the seizure, the "Carolina" had on board 686 seal-skins, the "Onward" 900, and the "Thornton" 404. These, as well as the schooners are, so far as the Minister is aware, still at Oonalaska, in possession of the United States' authorities. The master and mate of the "Thornton" were brought for trial before Judge Dawson, G& in the United States' District Court at Sitka, on tbnp» 3j$h August, 1886. The evidjenfle^ given by the officers of the United States' Revenue cutter went to show that this vessel was seized for the offence of taking seals in that portion of Behring's Sea ceded to the United States by Russia in 1867, being then at a distance of from 60 to 70 miles from St. George's Island. The Judge charged the jury to the effect that, if they"believed the defendants to have been sealing in the Behring Sea, east of the 193rd degree of longitude west, they should bring in a verdict of 1 Guilty," and assess separate fines or imprisonment. The jury brought in a verdict of " Guilty." The master of the "Thornton" was sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment, and to pay a fine of 500 dollars, and the mate to thirty days' imprisonment and a fine of 300 dollars. The masters and mates of the "Onward" and ''Carolina" were mulcted in similar penalties. On the 23rd and 24th September, 1886, Orders in Council were approved by his Excellency, the Governor-General, setting forth the above facts, and representing the injustice to which Canadian citizens engaged in a peaceable and lawful occupation on the high seas had been subjected, in spite of admitted principles of international law, and in direct opposition to the United States' contention of what constitutes common waters on the Atlantic coasts, and copies thereof were forwarded to Her Majesty's Government, with a request that immediate reparation be demanded from the United States' Government. On the 12th November, 1886, Mr. Bayard informed Sir L. West that he was awaiting full and authentic reports of the trial and Judgmentrm the cases of these seizures before further discussing the matter. On the 8th January, 1887, the Earl of Iddesleigh addressed Sir L. West, deprecating the delay which had taken place in securing the particulars, calling upon him to urge, with all the force which the gravity of the cases demanded, the immediate attention of the United States' Government to the action of the American authorities in their treatment of these vessels, mates, and crews, and directing him to seek assurance that pending a settlement of the question, no seizures of British vessels would be made beyond the territorial waters of Alaska. On the 9th January, 1887, Sir L. West wrote to Mr. Bayard, reviewing the whole case, and urging immediate action. On the 12th of the same month Mr. Bayard replied, explaining the reasons of the delay, and stating that every possible dispatch had been made in order to procurejthe necessary papers. On the 3rd February Mr. Bayard informed Sir L. West that the documents relative to these seizures left Sitka on the 26th January, and might be expected to reach him within a fortnight. In the meantime, he informed the British Minister that orders had been issued for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection with these seizures, and that the conclusion of any questions involved must be reserved until the papers relating thereto had arrived. On the 4th February Sir L. West communicated the above information to his Excellency the Governor-General. The Minister further states that from information received from the owners of the seized vessels, and from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, he learns that James Ogilvie, an old man and master of the "Carolina," was arrested along with the masters and mates of the " Onward " and '•' Thornton," and brought into Court for trial, but that before sentence was pronounced he was suffered to wander away in the woods, where he died from want and'exposure; that the other masters and mates after remaining several months in prison were released by order of the Governor of Alaska, and turned adrift literally destitute to find their way as best they could to their homes 1,500 miles distant, and which could be reached only by a long and costly sea voyage; that the owners of the condemned vessels have received no intimation from the United States' authorities of the release of their vessels or the restoration of the valuable cargo of sealskins and equipments on board, and that they have no information as to the condition in which their, property is at the present time. The owners are thus left in complete uncertainty as to when or where their property is to be restored, and anticipate serious damage, if not total loss, to their vessels from the tremendous gales which during the past winter have swept the North Pacific coasts. They also state that, knowing well as they do the character of the Indians in that vicinity, and apprehending that no very vigilant watch has been kept over their property, they fear that everything movable will have been carried away. If they are compelled to receive the vessels at Oonalaska; where they have been detained, it will necessitate the chartering; of a steamer, ® with men and supplies, at great expense and a round voyage of some 3,000 miles in order to bring them to Victoria. »a-flphe consequent damage and loss to vessels and cargoes through detention, and the heavy cost which will be entailed in bringing them to the home port, the owners consider good grounds for daimrmj"ConsideTatiOC( "from the United "States' authorities" whdn the question of reparation is being settled. The Committee concurring in the foregoing Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries advise that your Excellency be moye^d to call the attention of Her Majesty's Government again to the grave injustice done by the United States' authorities to British subjecjts, peaceably pursuing their lawful occupations on the high seas, and to the great delay which has'taken place in inqujring.intp and redressing the wrongs committed to the severe, inhospitable, and unjustifiable treatment of the officers and crews of the vessels seized, and to the serious loss inflicted upon owners of the same, in order that full and speedv reparation may be made by the United States' Government. All which. js respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, \qr&rtasxn Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 40. Mr. Hamley to Mr. Tilton. Sir, Custom-House, Victoria, April 23, 1887. IN reply to your letter of the 15th instant, I beg to state that none of the masters or mates of the vessels seized in Behring's Sea in August last remain now in imprisonment. When the vessels were condemned the Judge, Mr. Dawson, sentenced masters and mates to fines, which were never paid, and to different terms of imprisonment. Ogilvie, master of the " Carolina," an old man, was arrested and brought into Court, but before the sentence was pronounced he wandered away into the woods and died there. The others, after serving a time in prison, were released by an order of the Governor and turned loose literally destitute, to find their way home in any way they could. The vessels themselves, " Carolina," " Onward," and " Thornton," are now, as far as we know, in Oonalaska, but unless they have been properly taken care of, which in such a place seems scarcely probable, they must during the winter munths have suffered greatly, even if they are still in existence. The skins taken from them are, we believe, stored in the Alaska Fur Company's warehouses at Oonalaska; the guns and ammunition were taken to Sitka, and are in the care of the United States' Marshal. The chronometers and charts of two of the vessels were left in Oonalaska with the vessels. The chronometer of the other, with one or two boats, was taken, we were told, as evidence to Sitka. No notice whatever respecting the release of the vessels or the delivery of their equipments or of the skins has been received by the owners. No word of any description has been conveyed to them by the United States' authorities. - I have, &c. (Signed) W. HAMKEY. Mess Iflo?. 1 Inclosure 4 in No. 40. rs. Came and Mansie to Mr. Tilton. ,ono : (I 3 Dear Sir, ' Victoria, B.C., April 14, 1887. YOUR advice of 2nd instant is to hand. In reply, would say we have not been advised whether the vessels are to be returned to us at Victoria, or are we to incur the expense and risk of taSg them from Oonalaska, and accept the skins in the condition they may be found, as an offset in full against the amounts set opposite them in our claims. The expense and risk of getting them to Victoria will be great, as there is no direct way of transferring men and supplies a distance of 1,500 miles. It will necessitate the chartering of a steamer, and, owing to the tremendous gales in the North Pacific the past winter, the vessels may be very seriously damaged, if not totally lost. Knowing the Indians as we do we anticipate everything movable will be carried away. 64 The vessels and skins are left in the care of not too friendly a concern, namely, the Alaska Commercial Company's agent, alias the United States' Marshal. Remaining, &c. (Signed) CARNE and MANSIE. No. 41. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, July 8, 1887. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 27th ultimo relating to the case of the seizure of certain British vessels when engaged in seal-fishing last autumn in Behring's Sea. In reply, I am to request that you will state to Sir H. Holland that, in Lord Salisbury's opinion, it is very desirable that, before any further representations are made to the United States' Government with a view to obtaining reparation, Her Majesty's Government should be in possession of the.records of the judicial proceedings in the District Court in Alaska, and instructions have been sent by telegraph to Sir L. West directing him to request that he may be furnished with these documents by the United States' Government for the use of Her Majesty's Government. I am further to request that this Department may be supplied with a copy of the papers which have been laid before the Canadian Parliament in regard to this question. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 42. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, July 9, 1887. REFERRING to your despatches of the 13th April and the 6th and 30th May last, and to previous correspondence, I transmit, for your information, a copy of a further letter from the Colonial Office relating to the question of the seizure last autumn of certain British vessels when engaged in seal-fishing in Behring's Sea.* Before giving you further instructions in regard to this matter, I should be glad to have the opportunity of examining the records of the judicial proceedings in the District Court in Alaska, and I request that you will at once apply to the United States' Secretary of State, and ask that these documents may be furnished to you for the use of Her Majesty's Government. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 43. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury,•^-(Received July 22.) My Lord, Washington, July 12, 1887. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of the 8th instant, I have the honour to transmit herewith printed copies of the judicial proceedings in the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska in the several cases of the schooners " Onward," "Carolina," and "Thornton," proceeded against on a charge of killing fur-seal in Alaska. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. ■rut *b \h: tt.uii So. 40. ■' 65 Inclosure in No. 43. In the United States District Court, foe tse District oe Alaska. The United States, Libellant, v. The Schooner "Thornton," her Tackle, fyc. — On Libel of Information for being engaged in the Business of killing Fur-iMl in Alaska. Transcript of Record. ON the 28th day of August, 1886, was filed the following Libel of Information :— In the District Court oe the United States eor the District oe Alaska. ; August Special Term, .1886. To the Honourable Lafayette Dawson, Judge of said District Court: THE libel of information of M. D. Ball, Attorney for the United States for the District of Alaska, who prosecutes on behalf of said United States, and being present here' in Court in his proper person, in the name and on behalf of the said United Sta-tepr against the schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, and against all persons intervening for their interest therein, in a cause of forfeiture, alleges and informs as follows :— That Charles A. Abbey, an officer in the Revenue Marine Service of the United States, and on special duty in the waters of the district of Alaska, heretofore, to wit, on the 1st day? of Atlgust, 1886,.within the limits of Alaska'territory, and in the watejs thereof, and within the civil and judicial district of Alaska, to wit, within the waters of that portion of Behring Sea belonging to the said district, on waters navigable from the sea by vessels of 10 or more tons burden, seized the ship or vessel, commonly called a schooner, the " Thornton," her tackle, apparel,, boats, cargo, and furniture, being the property of some person or persons to the said Attorney unknown, as forfeited to the United States, for the following causes :— fqat the said vessel or schooner was found engaged in killing fur-seal within the limits of Alaska Territory, and in the waters thereof, in violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States. And the said Attorney saith that all and singular the premises are and were true, and within the Admiralty and maritime jurisdiction of this Court, and that by reason thereof, and by force of the Statutes of the United States in such cases made and provided, the afore-mentioned and described schooner or vessel, being a vessel of over 20 tons burden, her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, became and are forfeited to the use of the said United States, and that said schooner is now within the district aforesaid. Wherefore the said Attorney prays that the usual process and monition of this honourable Court issue in this behalf, and that all persons interested in the before- inentioned and described schooner or vessel may be cited in general and special to answer the premises, and all due proceedings being had, that the said schooner or vessel,. her tackle, ^.pparek boats, cargo, and furniture may, for the' cause aforesaid, and others appearing, be condemned by the definite sentence and decree of this honourable Court, as forfeited to the use of the said United States, according to the form of the Statute of the said United States in such cases made and provided. (Signed) M. D. BALL, United States' District Attorney for the District of Alaska. Whereupon forthwith issued the following monition:— District of Alaska, Set., The President of the United States of America to the Marshal of the District of Alaska, greeting :— Whereas a libel of information hath been filed in the District Court of the United States for the District of Alaska, on the 28th day of August, in the year 1886, by M. D. Ball, United States' Attorney for the district aforesaid, on behalf of the United States of America, against the schooner "Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, as forfeited to the use of the United States for the reasons and causes in said libel of information mentioned, and praying the usual process and monition of the said Court in that behalf to be made, and that all persons interested in the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, &c, may be cited in general [128J K 66 and special to answer the premises, and all proceedings being had, that the said schooner "Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture may, for the causes in the said libel of information mentioned, be condemned as forfeited to the use of the United States. You are therefore hereby commanded to attach the said schooner " Thornton,'' her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, to detain the same in your custody until the further order of the Court respecting the same, and to give notice to all persons claiming the same, or knowing or having anything to say why the same should not be condemned and sold pursuant to the prayer of the said libel of information, that they he and appear before the said Court to be held in and for the District of Alaska, on the 4th October, 1886, at 10 o'clock in the forenoon of the same day, if the same shall be a day of jurisdiction, otherwise on the next day of jurisdiction thereafter, then and there to interpose a claim for the same, and to make their allegations in that behalf. And what you shall have done in the premises do you then and there make return thereof, together with this writ. Witness the Honourable Lafayette Dawson, Judge of said Court, and the seal thereof affixed at the City of Sitka, in the District of Alaska, this 28th day of August, in the year of our Lord 1886; and of the Independence of the United States, the 111th. (Seal.) ANDREW T. LEWIS, Clerk. On September 6, 1886, was filed the following affidavit:— In the United States' District Court in and eor the District oe Alaska, United States op America. The United States of America v. the Schooner " Thornton." United States of America, District of Alaska, ss. C. A. Abbey, being duly sworn, deposes and says :— That he is, and at all times hereinmentioned was, a Captain in the United States' Revenue Marine, and in command of the United States' Revenue-cutter " Corwin." That affiant and the following named officers of said " Corwin" are material and necessary witnesses for the United States in the above entitled action: J. C. Cantwell, Lieutenant; J. U. Rhodes, Lieutenant; J. H. Douglass, pilot. That owing to scarcity of provisions and fuel upon said cutter " Corwin," the said I Corwin " and deponent and said witnesses will be obliged to and are about to go to sea within five days, and out of the district in which the said case is to be tried, and to a greater distance than 100 miles from the place of trial of said action before the time of said trial. That there is urgent necessity for taking the depositions of affiant and said witnesses forthwith. That Hans Guttormsen was master, and in possession of said schooner " Thornton " at the time of seizure thereof. (Signed) C. A. ABBEY. Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 6th day of September, 1886. (Signed) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk. On the same day was entered the following order:— In the Matter of the United States v. Schooner "Thornton," Case No. 50; Schooner "Carolina," Case No. 51; Schooner "Onward," Case No. 49; Schooner "San Diego," Case No. 52. In the above entitled actions urgent necessity and good cause appearing therefor from the affidavits of C. A. Abbey, now on motion of M. D. Ball, United States' District Attorney for Alaska, and Counsel for the United States herein, it is ordered that the depositions of the witnesses C. A. Abbey, J. W. Howison, J. C. Cantwell, J. U. Rhodes, J. H. Douglass, C. T. Winslow, Albert Leaf, C. Wilhelm, Thos. Singleton, and T. Lorensen be taken before the Clerk of the said District Court on Tuesday, the 7th day of September, 1886, at 7 o'clock.p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached at the office of said Clerk at Sitka, Alaska; and if not completed on said evening, then 67 the taking of said depositions to be continued by said Clerk, from time to time, until completed. That notice of the time and place of taking said depositions be served by the Marshal of said district on Hans Guttormsen, James Blake, Daniel Munroe, and Charles E. Raynor, and upon W. Clark, Esq., Attorney at Law, or or before the 7th September at 12 a.m., and that such shall be due and sufficient and reasonable notice of the taking of said depositions. Done in open Court this 6th day of September, 1886, now at this time W. Clark, Esq., being present in Court, waives service of notice. On the 7th day of September, 1886, was filed the following notice and return:— In the United States' District Court in and eor the District op Alaska, United States op America. The United States of America v. the Schooner " Thornton." To Hans Guttormsen greeting : you are notified that by order of Lafayette Dawson, Judge of said District Court, the depositions of C. A. Abbey, J. C. Cantwell, J. U. Rhodes, and J H. Douglas will be taken before the Clerk of said District Court at his office in Sitka in said district on Tuesday, the 7th September, 1886, at 7 o'clock p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be reached, and if not completed on said evening, the taking of said depositions will be continued by said Clerk from time to time until completed. Dated the 7th September, 1886. (Signed) ANDREW T. LEWIS, Clerk. United States of America, District of Alaska, ss. This is to certify that on the 7th day of September, 1886, before 12 o'clock noon of that day, 1 served the annexed notice on the within-named Hans Guttormsen, at Sitka, District of Alaska, by then and there personally delivering to said Hans Guttormsen a copy of said notice; and then and there gave him the privilege of being present at the taking of said depositions. Dated the 9th September, 1886. (Signed) BARTON ATKINS, United States' Marshal. On the 10th September, 1886, were filed the following depositions:— In the United States' District Court in and eor the District oe Alaska, United States op America. The United States v. the Schooner " Thornton," No. 50. Depositions of witnesses sworn and examined before me on the 7th day of September, 1886, at 7 o'clock p.m. of said day, and on the 8th and 9th September, 1886, thereafter, at the Clerk's Office of said Court in Sitka, District of Alaska, United States of America, by virtue and in pursuance of the order of the said Court, made and entered in the above entitled action on the 6th September, 1886, directing that the testimony and depositions of said witnesses be taken before me at said first-mentioned time and place, and at such subsequent times as the taking of the same might be continued to by me, in said action then and there pending in said District Court between the United States as plaintiff and the schooner " Thornton " as defendant, on behalf and at the instance of the said plaintiff the United States, and upon notice of the time and place of the taking of said depositions served upon Hans Guttormsen, the Captain of the said schooner, and in possession thereof at the time of seizure, and upon W. Clark, Esq., his Attorney, the owners thereof being unknown and without the jurisdiction of this Court. Captain C. A. Abbey, being duly sworn, deposes and says :— Q. State your name and occupation.—A. Captain C. A. Abbey, in the United States' - Revenue Marine Service, at present in command of the United States' Revenue steamer " Corwin,'' on special duty in Alaskan waters, for the protection of the Seal Islands and of the Government interests in Alaska generally. [128] K 2 6$ Q. What were yoii doing and what occurred on the 1st day of August last in the line of your duty ?—A. I was cruizing in Behring Sea about 70 miles south-south-east from St. George Island, in about latitude and longitude . I found the four boats of the British steam-schooner "Thornton," of Victoria, British Columbia, engaged in killing fur-seal. Each boat had in her from three to eight freshly killed seal, arms, and ammunition, rowers, and hunters, who stated that they belonged to the said schooner " Thornton," and were engaged in taking or killing fur-seal. Some of them, if not all, were seen shooting at the fur-seal which were swimming in their neighbourhood. On this evidence, I caused the vessel to be seized by Lieutenant Cantwell, took her in tow, and proceeded with her to Oonalaska, where I placed the vessel, cargo, tackle, furniture, and appurtenances in charge of Deputy United States' Marshal Isaac Anderson, of Oonalaska, the cargo of fur-seal skins being stored in " Keuch," in one of the warehouses of the Alaska Commercial Company, and under seal. One boat of the "Thornton " was sent to Sitka by the schooner " San Diego," and placed in custody of the United States' Marshal at Sitka. All of this property is now in the custody of the United States' Marshal at Sitka, including her arms and ammunition, which I brought to Sitka on the | Corwin." Q. Was this the vessel against which the libel of information is filed ? --A. It is. Q. Did this all occur within the waters of Alaska and the Territory of Alaska, and within the jurisdiction of this Court ?—A. It did. Q. Did this occur within the waters of the sea navigable for vessels of 10 tons burden or over ?—A. It did. (Signed) C. A. ABBEY. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of September, a.d. 1886, after having been read over by me to deponent. (Seal.) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk, United States' District Court. .- ■>. . ■ Lieutenant John C, Cantwell, being duly sworn, deposes and says:— Q. State your name, occupation, and'age.—A. John C. Cantwell, Third Lieutenant- United States' Revenue Marine Service, at present on duty United States' Revenue steamer " Corwin," and over the age of 21 years. Q. Were you so on the 1st day of August last ?—A. I was. Q. State what occurred on that day in the line of your duty.—A. I saw a small boat on the port bow; we came up to her, and found she had about eight fur-seal aboard. The men in the boat were armed with breech-loading rifles. In answer to the Commanding Officer, the men admitted they were killing fur-seal. Shortly after we picked up a second boat, and then sighted the schooner | Thornton." There were dead seal in the second boat. I did not examine the other boats ; I was sent on board the schooner, saw Hans Guttormsen apparently acting as captain, and Henry Norman as mate. I asked them what they were doing ? The captain replied, " Catching seals." I signalled this to Captain Abbey, who directed me to seize her, which I did, and the " Corwin 1 took the schooner in tow. The fur-seal in the boats were bleeding, and must have been killed within a few hours. Q. How many men were on board of the " Thornton " at the time of seizure ?— A. About fifteen. Q. Was this a reasonable number for ordinary purposes of commerce and navigation ?—A. It was an unusually large number for the size of the vessel. Q. Do you recognize this paper ?—A. I do. It is the official inventory made by me of the furniture, tackle, and cargo of the schooner "Thornton" (inventory embraces the usual furniture, rigging, nautical instruments, boats and stores of a vessel of this class, with a cargo of 403 seal-skins, 3 seal-pup skins, and 1 hair seal-skin, and they are receipted for by I. Anderson, Deputy United States' Marshal, Oonalaska, the 14th August, 1.886); the item 403 seal-skins mentioned in the inventory are fur seal-skins: this inventory gives a full and correct list of all the furniture, tackle, and cargo of said vessel, with the exception of the following: arms and ammunition, octant, and one chronometer. There is one boat belonging to the "Thornton" that was sent down on the "San Diego" and included in the inventory of the " San Diego." The "Thornton " had four boats, (Signed, JOHN C. CANTWELL, 3rd Lieutenant, United States' Revenue Marine. 69 Subscribed and sworn to befoW'me this 9th day of September, a.d. 1886, after having been read over by me to deponent. (Seal.) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk, United States' District Court. John U. Rhodes, being duly sworn, deposes and says:— Q. State your name, age, and occupation ?—A. John U. Rhodes, over 21 years of age, and Lieutenant in the United States Revenue Marine, and attached to the Revenue steamer " Corwin," and was so on the 1st August, 1886. Q. State what happened on the last-named day in connection with the schooner " Thornton "?—A. I was on the " Corwin " at the time the " Thornton " was seized on that day. We first picked up a boat bearing the name " Thornton ;" it had about eight dead fur-seal in it, the men in the boat had breech-loading rifles : we afterwards picked up another boat, and then sighted the schooner " Thornton," and went on board, and was put in charge of. her. We afterwards picked up two more boats; the men in the boats claimed that the boats belonged to the " Thornton," and were put on board of her. There were between fifteen and twenty dead fur-3e'al ort deck and one hair-seal. These seal were most of them bleeding and evidently recently killed. The captain and several of the hunters said they had killed twenty-one, I think it was, fur-seals that day, and would have got more if they had had more daylight and if the cutter had not come up. Q. Do you recognize these papers ?—A. I do. This paper marked (Ex. " G ") is the clearance paper of the schooner " Thornton " (this paper represents the British steam- schooner " Thornton," Hans Guttormsen, master, 22-30 tons, navigated with fifteen men, bound for the Pacific Ocean, Behring Sea, and Okhotsk Sea, on a hunting and fishing voyage, as having cleared from Victoria, British Columbia, the 15th May, 1886). 'Ems paper marked (Ex. " H ") is her bill of health (issued same date and place with clearance). I found these papers in the schooner " Thornton " at the time of seizure, and then took possession of them. Q. What was the list of arms and ammunition found aboard the schooner "'Thbrriton" at the time of seizure ?—A. Four rifles, 6 shot-guns, 867 shot-gun cartridges, 420 rifle-gup cartridges, 108 lbs. powder, 1 keg powder partly filled, 2 bags bullets, 11 bags buck-shot, 5 boxes wads, 3£ boxes primers. Q. What has become of these arms and ammunition?—A. They were delii the United States' Marshal at Sitka, and are now in his custody. (Signed) JOHN U. RHODES, Lieutenant, United States' Revenue Marine. d to m Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8th day of September, a.d. having been .read over by me to the deponent. (Seal.) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk, United States' District Court. 1886, after John U. Rhodes, being duly sworn, deposes and says :— Q. State your-name, age, and occupation ?—A. John U. Rhodes, Lieutenant United States' Revenue Marine, at present on duty on the United States' Revenue steamer "Corwin," and over the age of 21 years. Q. State what nautical instruments, if any, were seized on the schooner " Thornton " except such as are included in her general inventory?—A. One chronometer, No. 1374, made by KesSels, and one octant. Q. What has become of this property ?—A. I turned it over to the United States' Marshal at Sitka, and it is now in his custody. (Signed) JOHN U. RHODES. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of September, a.d. 1886, after having been read over by me to deponent. (Seal.) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk, United States' District Court. J. H. Douglass, being duly sworn, deposes and says: — Q.. State your name, age, and occupation ? — A. J. H. Douglass, am over the age of 21 yeairs^ am-a-^ailot in the Revenue Marine Service of the United States, and have been 70 so for the seven years last past. I am now and on the 1st August, 1886, was pilot on the Revenue steamer | Corwin." Q. State what occurred on the last-named day in connection with the schooner " Thornton " ?—A. We sighted a boat on our port bow and soon after saw another boat, steamed to the first boat and ordered her to come alongside, which she did. The name "Steamer Thornton " was on the stern of the boat. There were two or three men in the boat with arms, and six or eight dead fur-seal, which had the appearance of having been lately killed. I asked the men what luck they had had. One of them replied, " We have six or eight, but not as good as some days." We took possession of the boat and contents by order of Captain Abbey. We then picked up the second boat, finding it engaged in the same business, then we sighted a schooner drifting without sail or steam, which proved to be the steam-schooner " Thornton." On coming up with her she was seized by order of Captain Abbey and taken in tow. We then picked up two more boats belonging to the " Thornton," having dead fur-seal on board. This was in Behring's Sea, about 65 miles south-east from St. George's Island, and about 500 or 600 miles to the eastward of the western boundary-line of Alaska Territory. Q. State what experience you have had in the fur-sealing business, and your knowledge of the habits of the fur-seal ?—A. I have been cruizing for more than fifteen years off and on in Alaskan waters, always as an officer or pilot, and have visited the Pribiloff Islands, St. Paul and St. George, several hundred times, and am perfectly familiar with the sealing business as conducted on tho'se islands, and understand the migrating habits of the fur-seals. From about the 1st May to about the 1st July of each year the fur- seal is migrating north, and mostly through the Unimak and Akutan Passes to these islands for breeding purposes. They go to no other place in the known world except these islands and Copper Island for breeding purposes. After the breeding season of about a month they begin to migrate south, and until November of each year are migrating south through Behring's Sea. During this season, from May till November, the fur-seal are plenty in the waters adjoining the Pribiloff Islands, and are migrating to and from these islands, and are at all times very plenty between Unimak Pass and said islands in a track about 30 miles wide, which seems to be their highway to and from said islands. The schooner " Thornton " and her boats when seized were directly on this track. (Signed) J. H. DOUGLASS. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8th day of September, a.d. 1886, after having been read over by me to deponent. (Seal.) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk, United States' District Court. In the United States' District Court in and for the District op Alaska, United States' op America. The United States v. the Schooner " Thornton." No. 50. Whereas, on the 6th day of September, 1886, the said District Court duly made and entered in the journal of said Court an order in the above-entitled action, directing that the testimony and depositions of the witnesses : C. A. Abbey, J, C. Cantwell, J. U. Rhodes, and J. H. Douglass be taken before me, the Clerk of said Court, at the time or times and place, and upon such notice as was specified in said order. Now, therefore, this is to certify:—That in pursuance of said order, on the 7th September, 1886, at 7 p.m., each and all of the above-named witnesses appeared before me at the Clerk's office of said Court at Sitka, District of Alaska, United States of America: that M. D. Ball, Esq., District Attorney of said Court and District, and W. H. Payson, Esq., appeared then and there on behalf of and as attorneys and proctors for the United States, the libellant herein; and W. Clark, Esq., then and there appeared on behalf of, and as Attorney and Proctor for the said schooner and her owners herein • and Hans Guttormsen then and there appeared in pursuance of notice served upon him. That I was unable to complete the taking of said depositions on said 7th day of September, 1886, and I continued the taking thereof on the 8th and 9th September, 1886 and completed the same on said last-named day. That the said parties by their said Attorneys and Proctors then and there appeared, and were present on each of said last- named days, and at all times during the taking of said depositions. That each of said witnesses was first duly cautioned and sworn by me, then, and there, that the evidence he 71 should give in said action, should be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, and thereafter each of said witnesses was then and there examined before me, and I then and there took down the statement and testimony of each of said witnesses, and reduced the same to writing in his presence, and then and there read the same over to him ; and he then and there, after the same had been so reduced to writing and read over to him, subscribed the same in my presence, and swore to the truth thereof. That the foregoing depositions are the depositions of said witnesses then and there taken before me as aforesaid. That due notice of the taking of said depositions was given as required by said order. In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and the seal of said District Court, this 9th day of September, 1886. (Signed) ANDREW T. LEWIS, Clerk, United States' District Court in and for the District of Alaska, United States of America. On the 20th day of September, 1886, was filed the following claim of Master for Owner:— In the United States' District Court por the District op Alaska. (In Admiralty.) In the Matter of the Libel of Information against the Schooner " Thornton," her Tackle, Apparel, Furniture, and Cargo.—Claim of Master for Owner. And now Hans Guttormsen, master of the schooner " Thornton " intervening for the interest of J. D. Warren of Victoria, British Columbia, the owner of the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, as set forth in the libel of information herein, appears before this honourable Court and makes claim to the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, as set forth in the said libel of information, and as the same are attached by the Marshal under process of this Court at the instance of M. D. Ball, Esq., United States' District Attorney for the District of Alaska. And the said Hans Guttormsen avers that the said J. D. Warren was in possession of the said schooner at the time of the attachment thereof. And that the said J. D. Warren above named is the true and bond fide owner of the said schooner, her tackle, apparel, cargo and furniture as seized by the said Marshal as aforesaid and that no other person is the owner thereof. Wherefore he prays to defend accordingly. (Signed) HANS GUTTORMSEN. Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of September, a.d. 1886. (Seal) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk of the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska. W. Clark and D. A. Dingley, Proctors for Claimant. On the same day was filed the following amended libel of information. In the United States' District Court in and eor the District of Alaska, United States' op America. (August Special Term, 1886.) To the Honourable Lafayette Dawson, Judge of said District Court: The amended libel of information of M. D. Ball, Attorney for the United States, for the District of Alaska, who prosecutes on behalf of said United States and being present here in Court in his own proper person, in the name and on behalf of the said United States, alleges and informs as follows, to wit:— That C. A. Abbey, an officer in the Revenue Marine Service of the United States, duly commissioned by the President of the United States, in command of the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin," and on special duty in the waters of the District of Alaska heretofore, to wit on the 1st day of August, 1886, within the limits of Alaska 72 Territory, and in the waters thereof, and within the Civil and Judicial District of Alaska, to wit—within the waters of that portion of Behring's Sea belonging to the United States and said District, on waters navigable from the sea by vessels of ten or more tons burden, seized the schooner "Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, being the property of some person or persons unknown to said Attorney. The said property is more particularly described as follows, to wit:— One schooner "Thornton" of Victoria, British Columbia,four boats with oars, sails, and gear; carpenter's and caulking tools and materials: five tons of coal, ten yards of canvas, clock, chronometer, nautical instruments, provisions, sails and running gear, ropes, twine, lamps, oil, casks, buckets, engine and gear, twenty sacks of salt, 403 fur-seal skins, one hair-seal skin, three pup-seal skins, four rifles, six shot guns, and arms and ammunition for same and all other property found upon or appurtenant to said schooner. That said C. A. Abbey was then and there duly commissioned and authorized by the proper Department of the United States to make said seizure. That all of said property was then and there seized as forfeited to the United States for the following causes:— That said vessel, her captain, officers and crew were then and there found engaged in killing fur-seals within the limits of Alaska Territory and within the waters thereof, m violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes, of the United States. That all the said property, after being seized as aforesaid, j^as brought into the port of Oonalaska in said Territory, and delivered into the keeping of Isaac Anderson, a Deputy United States' Marshal of this District, with the exception of the said arms and ammunition, which latter>were brought into the port of Sitka in said District and turned over to the United States' Marshal of this District and all of said property is now within the Judicial District of Alaska, United States' of America. And the said M. D. Ball, Attorney as aforesaid, further informs and alleges :— That on the 1st day of August, 1886, Henry Norman, and.certain other persons whose names are to said United States' Attorney unknown, who were then and there engaged on board of the said schooner "Thornton" as seamen and seal-hunters, didj under the direction and by the authority of Hans Guttormsen, then and there master'oi said schooner, engage in killing and did kill, in the Territory and District of Alaska, and in the waters thereof, to wit, twenty fur-seals, in violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, in such cases made and provided. That the said 403 fur-seal'skins, three pup-skins, one hair-seal skin, and other goods so seized on board of said schooner " Thornton " constituted the cargo of said schooner at the time of the killing of said fur-seals, and at the time of. said, seizure. And said Attorney saith that all and singular the premises were and are true and within the Admiralty and Maritime Jurisdiction of the United States and of this Honourable Court, and that by reason thereof, and by force of the Statutes in such cases: made and provided, the aforementioned schooner, being a vessel of over twenty tons burden, and her said tackle, apparel, boats, cargo and furniture, became and are forfeited to the use of the United States. Wherefore the said Attorney praya that the usual process and monition of this Honourable Court issue in his behalf against said schooner and all said hereinbefore described property to enforce the forfeiture thereof, and requiring notice to be given to all persons to appear and show cause, on the return day of said process why said forfeiture should not be decreed; and that after due proceedings are had, all of said property be adjudged, decreed, and condemned as forfeited to the use of the United States; and for such other relief as may be proper in the premises. Dated the 20th September, 1886. (Signed) M. D. BALL, United States' District Attorney for the District of Alaska. On the same day was filed the following demurrer:— In the United States' District Court por the District op Alaska. United States v. J. D. Warren and Schooner " Thornton."—Demurrer. The demurrer of J. D. Warren, claimant of the property proceeded against in the above cause to the information filed herein. 1. The said claimant by protestation, not confessing all or any of the matters in said amended information contained to be true, demurs thereto and says that the said matters in manner and form, as the same are in the information stated and set forth, are 73 not sufficient in law for the United States to have and maintain their said action for the forfeiture of the property aforesaid. 2. The said claimant by protestation denies that this Court has jurisdiction to determine or try the question hereby put in issue. 8. And that the said claimant is not bound in law to answer the same. Wherefore claimant prays that said information may be dismissed with costs. (Signed) W. CLARK and D. A. DINGLEY, Proctors for Claimant. Which demurrer was overruled by the Court, and on the same day was filed the following answer:— In the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska. United States v. J. D. Warren and Schooner " Thornton."—Answer of Claimant. The answer of J. D. Warren, owner and claimant of the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, cargo, and furniture, as the same are set forth in the information filed herein in behalf of the United States. And now comes J. D. Warren, claimant as aforesaid and for answer to the said information against the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, furniture and cargo, as set forth in said information says that the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo as set forth in the information mentioned, did not nor did any part thereof become forfeited in manner and form as in said information in that behalf alleged, or at all. Wherefore, the said claimant prays that said information be dismissed with costs of this claimant attached. (Signed) W. CLABK and D. A. DINGLEY, Proctors for Claimant. On the 22nd September, 1886, were filed the following exceptions to answer:— United States' District Court, District op Alaska, United States of America. United States v. the Schooner " Thornton." No. 50. The said libellant hereby excepts to the sufficiency of the defendant's answer herein, on the following grounds :— 1. Said answer is not properly or at all verified as required by Rule 27 of the United States' Admiralty Rules; 2. Said answer is not full, explicit or distinct to each or any allegation of the libel herein, as required by said Rule; 3. Said answer does not deny or admit any of the allegations of fact in said libel, but merely denies a conclusion of law. (Signed) M. D. BALL and W. H. PAYSON, Proctors for Libellant. September 21, 1886. Which exceptions were sustained by the Court, and on the same day was filed the following amended answer:— In the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska. United States' v. /. D. Warren and Schooner " Thornton."—Amended Answer. To the Honourable Lafayette Dawson, Judge of the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska. Hans Guttormsen, master of the schooner " Thornton," intervening for the interest of and in behalf of J. D. Warren, owner and claimant of said schooner "Thornton," her "tackle, apparel, furniture and cargo for amended answer to the libel of information herein, against said schooner, her tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, alleges as follows:— 1. That he denies each and every material allegation in said libel of information contained; [128] L 74 2. Denies that the said schooner "Thornton," her tackle, apparel, furniture, cargo, and the property appertaining thereto, as set forth and described in said libel of information or any part thereof became forfeited to the United States; H Denies that said schooner, her captain, officers, and crew, or any one of them were found engaged in killing fur-seal within the limits of Alaska Territory and within the waters thereof in violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States as set forth in Said libel of information or at all; 4. Denies that they killed any number of fur-seal or other fur-hearing animals within the waters of Alaska or the Territory of Alaska or in any part thereof. 5. That all and singular the premises herein are true. Wherefore said master prays that this Honourable Court will be pleased to pronounce against the libel herein and that the same may be dismissed with costs to the claimants to be taxed. (Signed) W. CLARK and D. A. DINGLEY, Proctors for Claimant. United States' District of Alaska, ss. Hans Guttormsen, being first duly sworn, says he is master of the schooner "Thornton," that he has heard read the foregoing answer and knows the contents thereof and that the same is true of his own personal knowledge. (Signed) H. ^UTTORMSEf.^l Kij>ij 1 -fc*a- ^oig^lkB^\&$fr!imift Subscribed and sworn to before me this 22nd day of September, a.d. 1886. (Signed) Andrew T. Lewis, Clerk of the United States' ifo g District Court for the District of Alaska. On the 4th day of October, 1886, the motion cited p. 54 was returned with the following indorsement: — Sitka District of Alaska, ss. Be it remembered, that, in obedience to the annexed monition, I have attached the within-described property and now hold the same in my possession subject to the order of this Honourable Court; And I have given due notice to all persons claiming said property to be and appear before this District Court on the 4th day of October, 1886, at 10 o'clock a.m., if the same shall be a day of jurisdiction, otherwise on the next day of jurisdiction thereafter, then and there to make their claims and allegations in that behalf:— And I have caused said notice to be published, and the same has been published in the "Alaskan," a newspaper published at Sitka in said District, on the 4th day of September, 1886, and in each issue of said newspaper subsequent thereto, until 4tKda»y of October, 1886. (Signed) BARTON ATKINS, Marshal, . : : M District of Alaska. Sitka, Alaska, October 4, 1886. On the same day was filed the following Decree :— In the United States' District Court in and for the District of Alaska, United States op America. United States v. the Schooner " Thornton." No. 50. The Marshal having returned on the monition issued to him in the above entitled action that, in obedience thereto, he has attached the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, cargo, and furniture, and has given due notice to all persons claiming the same to appear before this Court on this 4th day of October, 1886, at 10 o'clock a.m., at the District of Alaska, United States of America, then and there to interpose their claims and make their allegations in that behalf; and Hans Guttormsem the captain of said vessel, having heretofore -filed a claim to all of said property on behalf of J. D. Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, the owner thereof, and no other person having appeared, and no claims or allegations having been made or filed herein by any other person or persons, and the usual proclamation having been made, and said cause 75 having-been heard upon the pleadings and proofs, M. D. Ball, Esq., and W. H. Pays^ Esq., appearing as advocates for said libellant, and W. Qlark as advocate for said .claimant, and said cause having been submitted to the Court for decision, and due ^deliberation being had in the premises, it is now ordered, sentenced, and decreed as follows:— 1. That all persons whatsoever other than said claimant be, and they are, hereby declared in contumacy and default. 2. That the said schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, boats, and furniture, and her cargo of 403 fur-seal skins, and all other property found upon and appurtenant to said schooner, be, and are hereby, condemned as forfeited to the use of the United States. 3. That unless an appeal be taken to this Decree within the time limited and prescribed by law and the Rules of this Court, the usual writ of venditioni exponas be issued to the Marshal commanding him to sell all of the said property and bring the proceeds into this Court to be distributed according to law. Costs to be taxed are awarded against said claimant. „,TPated October 4, 1886. (Signed) LAFAYETTE DAWSON, liirfc^r; fer*tti District Judge. a-IDone'Hn open Court this 4th day of October, 1886, at Sitka, District of Alaska, 39%i£ed States' of America. (Signed) Clerk. On the same day was filed the following motion to set aside Decree :— In the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska. United States v. J. D. Warren and Schooner " Thornton."—Motion to set aside Decree. Now come W. Clark and D. A. Dingley, proctors intervening for and in behalf of the claimants herein, and moves the Court to set aside the Decree rendered herein for the reason that the evidence produced on behalf of the United States is wholly insufficient upon which to base said Decree. (Signed) W. CLARK and D. A. DINGLEY, |^ Proctors for Claimant. Which motion was over-ruled by the Court, and on the same day was filed the following notice of appeal:— In the United States' District Court for the District op Alaska. United States v. J. D. Warren and Schooner " Thornton."—Notice of Appeal. And now come W. Clark and D. A. Dingley, proctors for and in behalf of the claimant herein, and notifies this honourable Court that they hereby appeal from the Decree rendered herein to the Circuit Court having appellate jurisdiction over this district, and that said appeal is taken on questions of law and fact, and prays the Court for an order on its clerk to. prepare a complete transcript of the record herein, as the law requires. (Signed) W. CLARK and D. A. DINGLEY, Proctors for Claimant. On the 9th day of February, 1887, was entered the following order:— In the Matter of the United States v. Schooner " Onward," Case No. 49; Schooner "Thornton," Case No. 50; Schooner "Carolina," Case No. 51; Schooner "San Diego," Case No. 52; Arms and Ammunition Schooner " Sierra" No. 57; Arms and Ammunition Schooner " San Diego," No. 58. In theiabove. causes, upon motion of the Attorney for the United States and argument of ^fcnsel for the United States, and for the interveners in said causes, and consideratioajby the Court, it is this day ordered that writs of venditioni exponas do issue from the clerk of said Court to the Marshal of said District, for the sale of the attached [128] I 2 76 vessels, with their tackle, cargoes, and furniture, of whatever description, and of the arms and ammunition attached in said causes. And as to the said attached vessels, that the sale of the same (except the schooner | San Diego," which shall be sold at Sitka) shall be made at Port Townsend, in the District of Washington Territory, and as to the seal-skins, part of the cargoes of said vessels attached, that sale of the same shall be made at San Francisco, in the District of California, and that sale of said schooner " San Diego," and all the other attached property be made at Sitka, in the District of Alaska. Thirty days' notice of such sale to be given at each of the places where the same are to be made, by posting such notice, or by publication in some newspaper published at such places respectively. And that said Marshal do have the moneys arising from such sales, together with the writ commanding the same, at a District Court of the United States for this, the said District of Alaska, to be held on the first Monday in September, 1887, and that he then pay the same to the clerk of said Court. Clerk's Office, United States' District Court, District of Alaska, Sitka, March 10, 1887. I, Andrew T. Lewis, clerk of the said Court, do certify that the foregoing transcript of the record in the case of the United States v. the schooner " Thornton," her tackle, apparel, &c, on libel of information, pending in said Court, has been compared by me with the original, and that it is a correct transcript therefrom and of the whole of such original, except the full text of the exhibits referred to in the testimony therein, the purport of which only is stated, and that the purport of said exhibits is correctly stated, as the same appears of record at my office and in my custody. Witness my hand and the seal of said Court, this 10th day of March, 1887. (Seal.) ANDREW T. LEWIS, Clerk. No. 44. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, August 2, 1887. I HAVE received your despatch of the 12th ultimo. Were judicial documents communicated without observation by the United States' Government ? No. 45. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, August 4.) My Lord, Washington, August 4, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform your Lordship that the judicial documents alluded to in your Lordship's telegram of the 2nd instant were, at my request, forwarded to me by the Secretary of State, for the information of Her Majesty's Government, and were unaccompanied by any observations. I have reason to think that no step will be taken in the matter of the seizure of sealers in Behring's Sea until the case against the captain of the " Corwin," which will be tried at Boston, has been heard. I have &c. (Signed) ' L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. i-llJ No. 46. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, AugustMO, 1887. I HAVE to inform you that a telegram has been received from the Commander-in- chief of Her Majesty's naval forces in the Pacific, dated Victoria, British^ Columbia, on the 7th instant, from which it appears that an American Revenue vessel had seized three more British Columbian scaling schooners when a long distance from land, and that 77 they had been taken to Sitka. He further stated that several other vessels in sight from Sitka were being towed in. It will be within your recollection that in the correspondence which has recently taken place in regard to the previous seizures of three British vessels by the United States' Revenue cruizer " Corwin," Mr. Bayard stated in a note dated the 3rd February (a copy of which accompanied your despatch of the following day), that "without conclusion at this time of day of any questions which may be found to be involved in these cases of seizure, orders have been issued by the President's direction for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith." I request that you will at once communicate to the United States' Government the nature of the information which has reached them in regard to these further seizures of British vessels by the United States' authorities. You will at the same time say that Her Majesty's Government had assumed, in view of the assurances conveyed to you in Mr. Bayard's note of the 3rd February last, that pending a conclusion of the discussion between the two Governments on the general question involved, no further similar seizures of British vessels would be made by order of the United States' Government. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 47. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, August 10, 1887. I HAVE to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch of the 12th ultimo, inclosing printed copies of the records in the United States' District Court for the District of Alaska in the cases of the British Columbian sealing schooners " Onward," " Carolina," and I Thornton." I should be glad if you would inform me whether the owners or masters of any of these vessels have entered an appeal against the Judgments delivered by the Court, and whether, if they have not already done so, such a course is still open to them. It is also desirable that Her Majesty's Government should be furnished with a full Report of the proceedings at the trials of the masters, which resulted in their conviction, and sentence to imprisonment and fine. I have further to request that you will endeavour to ascertain and to report to me when it is probable that the appeals referred to in your despatches of the 2nd April, 1887, and of the 6th May, 1887, respectively, of the owners of the American ships which were seized on similar grounds, will come on for hearing, and whether any arrangement has been, or can now, in your opinion, advantageously be made between the owners of the British and American vessels on the one side and the Government of the United States on the other, that one of these cases should be regarded as a test case, by which, in so far as the American legal Tribunals are concerned, the remaining cases might be held to be concluded. It must, however, be clearly understood that any such arrangement, if made, would only affect the legal remedies which were open to the masters and owners of these vessels in the American Courts, and would in no degree limit the right of Her Majesty's Government, after all such legal remedies were considered to be exhausted, to intervene through diplomatic channels and on international grounds on behalf of such masters or owners. It is presumed that the records of the proceedings in the cases of the seizures of the British schooners which accompanied your despatch were communicated officially to Her Majesty's Legation, and, if so, 1 request that you will furnish me with a copy of the note by which they were accompanied. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 48. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received August 26.) My Lord, Washington, August 15,1887. IN obedience to the instruction contained in your Lordship's despatch of the 10th instant, I informed the Secretary of State that three British Columbian schooners 78 had been seized in .Behring's Sea by the United States' cruizers a long distance from Sitka, and that several other vessels were in sight being towed in. I also intimated to Mr. Bayard that, in view of the assurances given in his note of the 3rd February last, Her Majesty's Government, had assumed that, pending the conclusion of discussions between the two Governments on general questions involved, no further seizures would be made by order of the United States' Government. Copy of. my. note is herewith inclosed. . I have likewise the honour to inclose to your Lordship copy of a note which I have received in reply to the above communication, in which Mr. Bayard states that he can discover no ground w'hatever, from the expressions contained in his note referred to, for the assumption by Her Majesty's Government that it contained any such assurances, but that he will ascertain without delay whether the circumstances attendant upon the cases of the seizures in question are the same as those which induced the Executive to direct the release, of the vessels mentioned in his note of the 3rd February. ick' I have, &c. ^'2*0. (Signed) pJl: S. SACKVILLE WEST.,;,- o \6 $bi Inclosure I in No. 46. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. ^iiifcmM Sir, WashingtonfAugust 11, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform you .$}at Her Majesty's Government have received a telegram from the Commander-in-chief of Her Majesty's naval forces in the Pacific, dated Victoria, British Columbia, 7th August, reporting the seizure by United States' cruizers of three British Columbian sealing schooners in Behring's Sea, a long distance from Sitka, and that several other vessels were in sight being towed in. In conveying this information to you, I am requested at the same time by the Marquis of Salisbury to state that, in view of the assurances given in your note of the 3rd February last, Her Majesty's Government had assumed that pending the conclusion of discussions between the two Governments on general questions involved,.no further seizure^would be rnade by order of the United States' Government. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 2 in No. 48. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, August 13, 1887. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 11th instant received yesterday afternoon, informing me of a telegraphic communication from the Commander-in-chief of Her Majesty's naval forces in the Pacific, dated at Victoria, British Columbia, August 7th, reporting the seizure of three British Columbian sealing schooners "in Behring's Sea, a long distance from Sitka," and that "several other vessels were in sight being towed in." The reference to my note to you of the 3rd February last, which you make under the instruction of the Marquis of Salisbury, has caused me to examine the expressions contained therein, and I can discover no ground whatever for the assumption by Her Majesty's Government, that it contained assurances " that, pending the conclusion of discussions between the two Governments on general questions involved, no further seizures would be made by order of the United States' Government." Until your note of the 11th instant was received I had no information of the seizure of the sealing vessels therein referred to, and have no knowledge whatever of the circumstances under which such seizures have been made. I shall at once endeavour to supply myself with the information necessary to enable me to reply to you more fully. The cases of seizure referred to in my note of the 3rd February, 1887, had occurred during the previous August, and upon the basis of the information then obtained I wrote you as follows :■— " In this connection I take occasion to inform you that, without conclusion at this time of any questions which may be found to be involved in these cases of seizure, orders have been issued by the President's direction for the discontinuance of ali pending 79 proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith." Having no reason to anticipate any other seizures1, nothing was saidl in relation to the possibility of such an occuxi;en_ce,.jaDJ do I find-in our correspondence, on the subject any grounds for such an understanding as jou inform me had been assumed to exist by Her Britannic Majesty's Government. A short time since, when you called upon me and personally obtained copies of the record of the judicial proceedings in the three cases of seizure m August lasVin Behring's Sea, nothing was said in relation to other cases. Whether the circumstances attendant upon the cases which you now report to me are the same as those winch induced the Executive to direct the releases referred to remains hereafter to be ascertained, and this with as little delay as the circumstances will permit. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 49. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received August 27.) (Extract.) Admiralty, August 24, 1887. I AM commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to send you herewith, for the perusal of the Marquis of Salisbury, extract from a letter from the Commander-in-chief on the Pacific Station, dated the 5th August, reporting the seizure of a sealing-schooner, named the " Anna Beck," by an American Revenue vessel in Behring's Sea. Inclosure in No. 49. Rear-Admiral Culme- Seymour to Admiralty. (Extract.) " Triumph," at Esquimalt, August 5, 1887. SINCE my return I hear that the "Anna Beck," a sealing schooner, has been seized by an American Revenue vessel in Behring's Sea—it is reported 60 miles north-east from St. George's Island ; but no reliable information as to the spot has yet reached' me: As soon as it does I will forward particulars. No. 50. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received September 1.) (Extract.) Washington, August 20, 1887. IT would appear from Reports of Captain Shepard, of the United States' Revenue cutter " Rush," that the "Sayward " was captured 50 miles and the " Dolphin ' 40 miles from Cape Cheerful, while the " Grace" was seized 95 miles from Ounalaska. Cape Cheerful does not appear on any Map or Chart, but is supposed to be the northernmost point of the Island of Ounalaska. The Islands of St. George and St. Paul (Pribylov Islands) are distant 180>miles from Ounalaska, so that at the time of the seizure of the " Grace " that vessel would have been 85 miles distant from them. To reach the breeding-grounds on the Islands of St. George and St. Paul, the- seals' pass regularly through the channel which separates the Island of Ounalaska from the Island of Akutan, and that which separates Akutan from the Island of Unimak, called^ respectively the Akutan and Unimak passes, and it is here that the sealers lay in wait for them on their passage. It is maintained that the capture of seals in this manner is in violation of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, and that ships so capturing them are within the limits of Alaska territory or in the waters thereof. But,-apart from the question of territorial limit and right to seize vessels in the open sea, it is argued by impartial persons that unless some arrangement is made for the protection of these valuable animals on their passage to the breeding-grounds, the genus, as in the case of beaver, will gradually become extinct. 80 It is a known fact that few, if any, seals pass outside the Island of Ounalaska to their breeding-grounds, which exist only on the Pribylov Islands, and that their passage is as regular as their breeding season. No. 51. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received September 1.) My Lord, Washington, August 22, 1887. SINCE writing my preceding despatch I have received privately from Mr. Bayard copies of the Reports of Captain Shepard, alluded to therein, respecting the seizure of the British vessels "Anna Beck," "W. P. Sayward," "Dolphin," and "Grace," copies of which I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith. The State Department is not in possession of any further information. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. P.S.—I have communicated copies of Captain Shepard's Reports to the Governor- General of Canada. L. S. S. W. Inclosure 1 in No. 51. Mr. Fairchild to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Treasury Department, August 19, 1887. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 13th instant, in which you refer to information received through the British Minister as to the recent seizures by United States'cruizers of three British Columbian sealing-schooners in Behring's Sea, and request such information as this Department possesses or can obtain from its Agents relative to said seizures; and, in reply thereto, I inclose herewith copies of the Reports of the Captain of the Revenue cutter "Rush," dated the 4th, 11th, and 18th ultimo, reporting the seizures of the British steam-schooner "Anna Beck" on the 2nd, the British steam-schooner "W. P. Sayward" on the 9th, the British steam-schooner "Dolphin" on the 12th, and the British steam-schooner "Grace" on the 17th ultimo. Respectfully yours, (Signed) C. S. FAIRCHILD, Secretary. Inclosure 2 in No. 51. Captain Shepard, U.S.R.M., to Mr. Fairchild. United States' Revenue Marine Steamer "Rush," Sir, Ounalaska, A. T., July 4, 1887. I HAVE the honour to report to the Department the seizure on the 30th June of the schooner "Challenge " of Seattle, Washington Territory, H. B. Jones, master, and Albert Douglas, of Seattle, Washington Territory, President of the Douglas Fur Company, managing owner, for violation of section 1961, Revised Statutes,—the having skins of female fur-seal and skins of unborn seal on board, which latter the captain and mate admitted were taken from the female seal killed by themselves or the crew of the vessel. The " Challenge " when found was anchored at Akoutau Island, Alaska : I took her in tow of the " Rush," and proceeded to Ounalaska and delivered her skins, 151 in number, to the United States' Deputy Marshal at this place, and have taken her arms and ammunition on board the | Rush " for safe keeping. The crew, consisting of fifteen men all told, were shipped at Port Townsend, Washington Territory, by H. Bash, United States' Shipping Commissioner, and were found present, excepting Wm. Couratz, of Germany, seaman, whom Captain Jones reports was taken sick and sent ashore at Goose Island, British Columbia, and Hines, an Indian of British Columbia, was shipped in his stead at that place. On the 2nd July, in latitude 54° 58' north and longitude 167° 26' west, Cape Cheerful, Ounalaska Island, bearing south-east £ east, 66 miles, I boarded and examined 81 the British steam-schooner " Anna Beck," of Victoria, British Columbia, Louis Olsen, master, Joe Bosquit, of Victoria, British Columbia, managing owner, on a sealing voyage, and having about 334 seal-skins on board, nineteen of which the captain admitted were taken in Behring's Sea. His boats had recently been taken out of the water, and considerable fresh seal blood and gurry were found on deck, indicating that seal had been skinned and dressed on board that day. I seized the vessel for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes, took in tow, and proceeded to Ounalaska. This vessel was seen on the 30th June, in nearly the same position as when we found her, by Captain Aage, of the steamer "Dora," with .several boats out hunting seal. I found on board a crew of nineteen men all told (seven white and twelve Indians), and the captain reported that on the 30th June two boats containing two Indians each were lost in the fog and could not be found, in addition to the above number. I have delivered the "Anna Beck," with outfit and 334 seal-skins, to the United States' Deputy Marshal at Ounalaska. No arms or ammunition were found on board. As the officers of these vessels have to be taken before the United States' District Court at Sitka for trial, to which place there is no established mode of conveyance from here, I have placed the officers and crews of both vessels on board the schooner "Challenge" and dispatched Benjamin Lorenzen, one of the crew of this vessel, duly qualified as a Deputy United States' Marshal, in charge, to Sitka, with instructions on his arrival at' that place to deliver the vessel, captains, and mates to the United States' Marshal, and to set the crews at liberty, Lorenzen to remain at Sitka until the arrival of the I Rush " at the end of the season. I am, &c. (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD. Inclosure 3 in No. 51. Captain Shepard, U.S.R.M., to Mr. Fairchild. United States' Revenue Marine Steamer I Rush," Sir, Ounalaska, Alaska, July 11, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform the Department that on the 9th July in the Behring's Sea, latitude 54° 43' north, longitude 167° 51' west, Cape Cheerful, Ounalaska Island, bearing south-east, true 59 miles distant, I boarded and examined the British schooner " W. P. Sayward," 59-79 tons register, of Victoria, British Columbia, Geo. R. Ferry, master, and W. D. Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, managing owner, and found her to be on a sealing voyage—had been four days in the Behring's Sea. The captain reported 485 seal-skins on board, sixty-four of which were taken in the Behring's Sea. Found the vessel under short sail, and one canoe and two Indians out hunting seal. Her crew consisted of six white men all told, and seventeen Indians from British Columbia, and two Indians belonging to the crew of the British schooner | Anna Beck," who had lost that vessel in a fog. I took charge of the vessel's papers and seized her for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes; took her in tow and proceeded to Ounalaska, arriving at midnight. I have delivered the 485 seal-skins found on board to the United States' Deputy Marshal at this place, and will send the vessel and her crew to Sitka, Alaska, in charge of One of the crew of this vessel duly qualified as a United States' Deputy Marshal, with instructions to deliver the vessel with her outfit, the captain and mate, to the United States' Marshal at Sitka on arrival at that port, and to set the crew at liberty. I am, &c. (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD. Inclosure 4 in No. 51. Captain Shepard, U.S.R.M., to Mr. Fairchild. United States' Revenue Marine Steamer " Rush," Sir, Ounalaska, Alaska, July 18, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform the Department that on the 12th July in the Behring's. Sea, latitude 54° 3S' north, longitude 167° 30' west, Cape Cheerful, Ounalaska Island, bearing south-east 5 south, 40 miles distant, I boarded and examined the British steam- schooner "Dolphin," 60 -^fe tons register, of Victoria, British Columbia, J. D. Warren, [128J M §i * master and managing owner, and found her to be on a sealing voyage. The vessfj^ad^ been three days in the Behring's Sea, and had 618 seal-skins on board. Ten canoes and one boat were out hunting seal at the time. From the canoes twelve or more dead seal were taken on board the schooner while we were near her, and three skins from seal recently killed were found in the boat. Seized the vessel for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes, and transferred her arms and ammunition on board the " Rush," viz., 4 breech-loading rifles, 26 breech-loading shot guns, 10 muzzle-loading shot guoft 1 bomb gun, 4 revolvers, 3,404 rounds ammunition for breech-loading rifles, 250 rounds ammunition for shot guns, 4 kegs powder, 50 lbs. shot and other small ammupjjion. Seized the 4 breech-loading rifles and ammunition for same for violation of section J 955, Revised Statutes, and section 4, Executive Order No. 53, dated the 4th May, 1887. I placed Lieutenant Dunwoody in charge, with instructions to take her into Ounalaska, where she arrived the following day. The crew consisted of seven white men and twenty- six Indians from British Columbia. On the 17th July, in the Behring's Sea, latitude 55° 3' north, longitude 168° 40'west, Cape Cheerful, Ounalaska Island, bearing south-east -J east, 96 miles distant, I boarded and examined the British steam-schooner " Grace," 76 -fife tons register, of Victoria, British Columbia, William Petit, master, and J. D. Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, managing owner, and found her to be on a sealing voyage; had been ten days m the Behring's Sea, and had 769 seal-skins on board. When boarded she had twelve canoes and one boat out hunting seal. Saw one seal shot and taken into the boat while we were near her. Counted twelve seals taken on board the schooner from one canoe, and all the canoes contained more or less seals recently killed. The captain reported taking ninety seals during the day and 150 the day previous. Seized the vessel for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes, and two breech-loading rifles and ammunition for same; for violation of section 1955, Revised Statutes, and section 4, Executive Order No. 53, dated the 4th May, 1887. Her crew consisted of 6 white men, 24 Indians, and 1 Chinaman. Placed Lieutenant Benham in charge, and after waiting seven hours for her canoes to return—some of which had been a long distance from the vessel—took her in tow and proceeded to Ounalaska, arriving at 9*30 A.M. I have delivered the seal-skins from these vessels, to the United States' Deputy Marshal at this place, and will send the vessels in charge of men from this vessel duly qualified as United States' Deputy Marshals to Sitka, to be delivered to the United States' Marshal for the district of Alaska. By request of Captain J. D. Warren, of the " Dolphin," managing owner of the schoouer "Anna Beck" (seized the 2nd July, as previously reported), I will send her to Sitka in like manner. Also on the 16th July, in the Behring's Sea, in latitude 55° 46' north, longitude 170° 38' west, Delnoi Point, St. George's Island, bearing north 30° east, 68 miles distant, I boarded and examined the schooner | Lily L.," 63 -ffig tons register, of San Francisco, California, J. W. Todd, master, and C. D. Ladd, of San Francisco, managing owner, and found her to be on a sealing voyage. Had three boats out at the time, one of which on returning to the vessel contained two seal recently killed. Captain Todd and Mr. Ladd, representing the owner, admitted they came into these waters for the purpose, and had taken seal in the Behring's Sea, and claimed a right to do so anywhere outside the 9-mile limit from the shore. I seized the vessel for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes. There being only two commissioned officers on board this vessel, I placed Boatswain Winslow on board the schooner to represent the United States, and instructed her captain to take her into Ounalaska, which he agreed to do, there being too much sea running at the time to undertake to tow her to that place. On her arrival I will make further report to the Department. I am, &c. (Signed)' L. G. SHEPARD. No. 52. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received September 7.) Sir, Adrdiralty, September 5, 1887. I AM commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit to you herewith, for the perusal of the Marquis of Salisbury, the accomp^fir^iig copy of a letter of the 9th August from Rear-Admiral Sir M. Culme-Seymour, with its inclosutes^9 83 respecting the seizure ofiCIhe British Columbian sqabng-schooners "Anna Beck" and " W. P.^jnvardJ? by an American Revenue steamer in the Behring's Sea. I am to request that these documents may be forwarded to the Colonial Office, with a request that they may edentuaOJy be reiurned to this Department. I am, &c. (Signed) R. D. AWDRY. Inclosure 1 in No. 52. Rear-Admiral Seymour to Admiralty. Sir, " Triumph," at Esquimalt, August 9, 1887. IN confirmation of my telegram of the 6th instant, I have the honour to report the British Columbian sealing-sehooners "Anna Beck," "Dolphin," and " W. P. Sayward " were seized in the Behring's Sea, between the 2nd and 12th July last, by the American Revenue steamer "Rush," and were towed to Ounalaska. Mr. Andrew Laing, mate and part owner of the " W. P. Sayward," came down here and returns torday to Sitka. He has made the following statement to me :— " The ' W. P. Sayward,' of Victoria, entered Behring's Sea on the 2nd July, having on board 479 skins, procured off the west coast of Vancouver Island, &c. On the 9th she was seized by the | Rush' about 50 miles to the northward and westward of Ounalaska, and was towed to Ounalaska, which took twelve hours. The skins on board were put into a lighter and taken to the Alaska Commercial Company's store. A quartermaster was put on board and the schooner sent to Sitka, the captain and myself being brought before Judge Dawson and bound over to appear on the 22nd August to answer a charge of' killing seals in American waters.' " No seals whatever had been taken since we entered Behring's Sea." I am informed that as the " Olympian," an American excursion steamer, was leaving Sitka, she saw a steamer coming in with several schooners in tow. fHls I inclose a copy of the indictment against the " W. P. Sayward," a copy of the declaration made by Mr. Andrew Laing before a Notary Public at Victoria, and also a cutting from the Victoria " Daily Colonist." I have, &c. (Signed) M. CULME-SEYMOUR. Inclosure 2 in No. 52. In the District Court of the United States for the District of Alaska. United States v. Geo. R. Ferry and A. Laing.—Information. District of Alaska, ss. GEORGE R. FERRY and A. Laing are accused by M. D. Ball, United States' District Attorney for Alaska, by this information, of the crime of killing fur seals within the waters of Alaska Territory, committed as follows :— The said George R. Ferry and A. Laing, on the 8th day of July a.d. 1887, in the District of Alaska and within the jurisdiction of this Court, to wit, in Behring's Sea, within the waters of Alaska Territory, did kill ten fur seals, contrary to the Statutes of the United States in such case made and provided, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. Dated at Sitka the 23rd day of July, 1887. I, M. D. Ball, United States' District Attorney for Alaska, being duly sworn, say the within information is true, as I verily believe. (Signed) M. C. D. BALL. Subscribed and sworn to before me, this 23rd day of July a.d. 1887. (Signed) H. E. Haydon, Clerk (By A. A. Meyer, Deputy Clerk). I certify that the within is a true copy of the information filed in the cause. (Signed) H. E. Haydon, Clerk (Bv A. A. Meyer, Deputy Clerk). [128] M 2 84 Personally appeared before me, Montague W. Tyrwhitt Drake, Notary Public, duly authorized, admitted, and sworn, residing and practising in Victoria, British Columbia,' Andrew Laing, mate of the British schooner " W. P. Sayward," who states the above- written information was served upon him by Mr. M. D. Ball on tie 23rd July, 1887. (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, Notary Public. Inclosure 3 in No. 52. Declaration. I, ANDREW LAING, of Victoria, mate of the British schooner i W. P. Sayward," do solemnly and sincerely declare that I left Victoria, British Columbia, in the schooner " W. P. Sayward" on the 16th day of May, 1887, bound on a sealing voyage, with a crew of seven men and sixteen Indian hunters with eight canoes. We commenced sealing off Cape Scott, on the north of Vancouver Island, and killed 479 fur-seals in the Pacific Ocean, and entered the Behring's Sea on the ^nd July, 1887, passing between Umnack Island and the Island of the Four Mountains. The weather was very thick and foggy, and we did no sealing in Behring's Sea in consequence. On the 9th July we were captured by the United States' steamei " Richard Rush," being then from 30 to 40 miles off the nearest land. We were taken in tow to Ounalaska, where we arrived on the 10th July, and they laid us alongside the steamer | St. Paul," belonging to the Alaska Commercial Company. They removed the seal-skins and took them ashore to the wharf and put them in the Company's warehouse, and they resalted the skins with salt taken from our vessel. They put an officer from the " Rush " on board and towed us out to sea and told us to go to Sitka. We arrived there on the 22nd July, and on the next day an investigation was held before Judge Dawson, who bound us over to appear on the 2^nd August for trial. The vessel was left in charge of the United States' officers, and we were only allowed to remove our clothing. The Indians were left to find their way home as they could; they were about 700 miles from their villages. I further say that when we were taken I spoke to the Captain of the " Rush " and told him we had not taken a seal in Behring's Sea ; he replied : 11 am sorrv for you ; I have to obey orders, and take everything I come across in Behring's Sea." And I make this solemn declaration by virtue of the Act passed in the thirty-seventb year of Her Majesty's reign, intituled, " An Act for the Suppression of Voluntary and Extra-Judicial Oaths." (Signed) A. LAING. Taken and declared before me at Victoria, this 8th day of August, 1887. (Signed) M. W. Tyrwhitt Drake, Notary Public. Inclosure 4 in No. 52. Extract from the " Victoria Daily Colonist" of August 6, 1887. Sealers Seized.—Another Piratical Act by the American Revenue Cutters.—The " Olympian," which arrived from Sitka yesterday, brought the startling news that another lot of British and American schooners had been captured by the Revenue cutter " Rush," and taken to Sitka, and that as the steamer was leaving the Revenue cutter again hove in sight, having a number of schooners in tow. Those in Sitka are the Victoria schooners "Dolphin," "Anna Beck," "Grace," " W. P. Sayward," and the American schooner " Challenger," of Seattle. With the schooners seized last year this makes seven British vessels now in charge of the Alaskan authorities, and they will, no doubt, be added to, as it seems the intention of the Americans to seize every schooner that they can secure anywhere within the waters of Behring's Sea. It was not thought probable that such measures would have been taken in the face of information received from Washington and Ottawa; however, a lack of diplomacy or of energy seems to have prevailed, and no decisive answer was given to the official queries made to the United States' authorities in regard to the programme they purposed following during the present season. The following statements of several of the captured sealers is taken from the "Alaskan" of the 30th July :— Captain Olsen, of the steam-schooner "Anna Beck," stated :— " 1 left Victoria on the 7th February last, clearing at the Custom-house for the purpose 85 of a sealing and fishing trip to the west coast of Vancouver Island, the North Pacific Ocean, and the Behring's Sea. " At the time the papers were issued by Mr. A. R. Milne, Collector of Customs, he made no observation about my vessel fishing, in Behring's Sea; neither did I say any thing to him. I supposed, from the fact that the papers were issued giving me such permission, there was no reason why I should not fish in Behring's Sea, and had I anticipated that there would be any trouble I would not have started on a voyage for such a .purpose. I It was the common talk amongst the people of Victoria that we were perfectly safe in fishing, as the American Government would not make any seizures this season. I don't understand why my vessel was seized, as personally I. was not engaged in catching seals. I purchase the seals from the Indians for the owners of the schooner, and I have no control whatever on the natives after they leave the vessel in their own canoes. I am not responsible if they catch seals after they have left the schooner's side ; they can come and go when they please." George R. Ferry, the Captain, A. Laing, the mate and part owner of the British schooner " W. P. Sayward,'' and Michael Keefe, mate of the " Anna Beck," said :— I We have heard read the statement of Captain Olsen, and agree with it in every -particular." I Michael Keefe: S It is certainly a strange thing for the Custom-house at Victoria to have issued papers to us permitting fishing in Behring's Sea. If it was not legal, why should the Collector have cleared the vessel? The general idea of sailors is that no Custom-house will issue papers to any vessel to go and do an illegal act.'" " Captain H. B. Jones, of the American schooner ' Challenger:'—j I left Seattle on 4he 15th April last, clearing at Port Townsend at the Custom-house for a hunting and walrus trip to the North Pacific and Arctic Oceans. 1 sealed up the coast 30 or 40 miles from shore as far north as the Aleutian Islands. I have never fished for seals in Behring's Sea. My schooner was seized in Akutan Harbour, whither I proceeded for the purpose of cleaning the bottom of the vessel and taking in a supply of water. The harbour is on Akutan Island, situated nearer the Pacific Ocean than the Behring's Sea. There are two ^passages between the North Pacific Ocean and the Behring's Sea at that, point, one being through Akum Pass and the other through Unimak Pass. The Akum Pass being full of .reefs and the Unimak Pass being comparatively safe I chose the latter, intending to clean my vessel and take in a supply of water. When anchored there 1 had not quite decided whether to come back in the Pacific Ocean or to keep on north, bound for the Arctic Ocean, my destination. The charge against me is of catching seals in Alaskan waters, that is, within 3 leagues of shore. Any one who knows anything of sealing is aware that such a charge is ridiculous, as we never look for seals within 20 miles of shore. They are caught all the way from between 20 and 150 miles of the land. The seals we packed up -on our vessel were shot between Cape Flattery and Saunakh, situated 40 miles south and east of Unimak Island. All this territory lies within the North Pacific Ocean." What makes the present seizures more inexplicable is the fact that the British -schooners seized last year were ordered to be released by Attorney-General Garland, as is -shown by the following copies of the orders in the possession of Came and Munsie, of this city :— (Copy of Telegram.) | Washington, D. C, January 26, 1887. "To Judge Lafayette Dawson and Mr. D. Ball, District Attorney, Sitka, Alaska. "I am directed by the President to instruct you to discontinue all further proceedings in the matter of the seizure of the British vessels ' Caroline,' ' Onward,' and 'Thornton,' and discharge all vessels now held under such seizure, and release all persons that may be -under arrest in connection therewith. (Signed) "A. H. Garland, Attorney-General." ■ '■ (Copy of Order.) ""To Barton Atkins, United States' Marshal for the District of Alaska. " You are hereby directed to release the vessels ' Carolina,' ' Onward,' ' Thornton,' -and 'San Diego,' which were seized in Behring's Sea for violation of section 1956, United •■■> ■''■!{ tsam 86 States' Statutes, together with their tackle, apparel, skins, guns, ammunition, small boats, and everything pertaining to said vessels. "This 19th day of February, 1887. (Signed) "Laeayette Dawson, " District Judge, District of Alaska." It would appear from the above that the United States had given up the foolish contention of possessing the control over the high seas. The following letter was received by Mr. Munsie from the Deputy Minister of Fisheries in reply to a letter:— " Sir, " Ottawa, April 2, 1887. " Having reference to your inquiry on the subject of claims for indemnity on the part of the owners of the Canadian sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea by the United Sta^' Revenue cutter 'Corwin,' who have been arrested and released; also that the conclusion of any questions involved is reserved for the present; and to inform you that the Government has forwarded to the Home Government the details of your claim to be indemnified for the loss consequent upon the seizure of your vessels. "I am, &c. (Signed) "John Tilton, "Deputy Minister of Fisheries." Again, in answer to another letter, Mr. Munsie received the following reply:— I Dear Sirs, " Ottawa, July 26,1887. "I have to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 19th instant, addressed to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, in which you state, ' We have not received a single word from the United States' Government about the " release of the vessels," ' referring, of course, to those seized last season. " On the 2nd April last I communicated to yon the decision of the President of the United States, in so far as releasing the vessels, &c, which letter you acknowledged. ■ Have you made any application for the surrender of the vessels, or have you reason to suppose the United States' Government would communicate the action to you by other means than the ordinary official channel ? "This Department lost no time in communicating the decision in question to you, with the expectation that you would at once take steps to regain possession of the vessels. " I am, &c. (Signed) "John Tilton, "Deputy Minister of Fisheries." From the above official orders of the American authorities and the correspondence of the Dominion Government, sealers here were quite natural in believing that no further seizures would be made during the present season. However, the reverse is the case, and the American authorities have evidently fully prepared in order to do as much injury as possible to the sealing interests outside those controlled by the Alaska Commercial Company. British and American sealers have fared alike. The latter probably the worst. Owners of vessels here are naturally indignant at the turn of affairs, and think that more definite information should have been given them before their vessels sailed as to the intentions of the Americans. Now that they are seized they consider the Imperial authorities should move at once in the matter, and demand instant redress from the United States for a breach of international law, and for the damages sustained by British subjects while legally fishing on the high seas. They are beginning to wonder if, indeed, England is mistress of the seas when such high-handed piratical acts as those perpetrated last year, and again repeated this, are allowed to occur without some protection being given to British subjects or redress secured for damage done to property and interests at the hands of Americans. From the " Alaskan " is also gathered the following in regard to the disposition of this and last year's seizures:— " Marshal Atkins has been notified by Deputy-Marshal Anderson of Ounalaska, that the Commander of the steamer • Rush' has delivered into his custody 964 fur seal-skins seized from the different prize vessels, the American schooner ' Challenger,' and the British schooners ' W. P. Sayward' and 'Anna Beck.' All the above-mentioned sealskins were packed and salted in a kinch in one of the Alaska Commercial Company's warehouses, awaiting further instruction from the Marshal. 87 " The ' Anna Beck' has been dismantled and a complete inventory taken of every- thing on board. "The 2,082 seal-skins, the result of last year's seizures, were shipped consigned to the Marshal on the Alaska Commercial Company's steamer ' Dora,' which left Ounalaska on the 8th July bound to San Francisco. " Nineteen Indians and three sailors, belonging to the ' W. P. Sayward,' and two of the ' Challenger's' crew, left Sitka in the early part of the week on board several canoes and one boat, en route for Victoria and Seattle. They took with them a large supply of provisions furnished by the commander of the ' Sayward.' " Marshal Atkins has received advices from the Deputy-Marshal at Ounalaska under a recent date, stating that the three British schooners seized last August in the Behring's Sga> dnd now lying at Ounalaska are in good condition, every care having been taken to protect them from injury. One of the vessels, which was in a leaky condition when first captured, was beached in order to save continuous pumping. " In the District Court on Tuesday morning, H. B. Jones, captain, and Carl Erickson, mate of the schooner ' Challenger,' Louis Olsen, captain, and Michael Keefe, mate of the steam schooner ' Anna Beck,' and George R. Ferry, captain of the schooner ' W. P. Sayward,' appeared before Judge Dawson and made an application that they be permitted to surrender their bonds on the ground that they were devoid of the funds necessary for their subsistence. The Court granted the application, and ordered that the defendants be placed in the custody of the United States' Marshal. 1 The arms and ammunition seized on the schooners ' City of San Diego' and 'Sierra'—comprising in all nine rifles and guns and about 1,400 cartridges—will be sold by auction in Sitka on Monday, the 8th proximo, by the Marshal. The seized arms and ammunition taken from the schooners ' San Diego,' ' Thornton,' and ' Onward,'— comprising some fifty rifles, breech-loading guns and rifles, and several thousand rounds of ammunition,—.will be offered for sale at Juneau as soon as the necessary instructions are received from Washington." Bayard's Opinion. l'he following telegram is another unofficial announcement, and seems to be rather out of harmony with the official acts of the commanders of the Revenue cutters :— " Washington, July 20. " Secretary Bayard, when he was shown to-day a despatch from Ottawa, stating that ' the Dominion Government is protesting against the discourtesy shown by the United :States' authorities in ignoring its demand for reparation for the seizure and detention of 'the British Columbia sealers seized in Behring's Sea last year,' said :—' In the first place, no demand was ever made to our Government by any body, either for the release of the vessels in question or for damages for their detention; and, in the second place, if any such demand had been made, it could not have come by any possibility from the Dominion Government, with which we have absolutely no diplomatic relations whatsoever. The vessels in question were released upon representations of the British Government that they were British vessels. They were released, because our right to hold them was deemed too doubtful to be enforced. Our Government did what it believed to be right in the matter, without constraint from any quarter. The probability is that the "Anna Beck," alleged to be a British steam schooner from Victoria, the arrest of which by the Revenue cutter " Rush " for alleged violation of our Alaska Revenue Laws was reported yesterday, will be released the same way if the facts are as alleged. The claim that Behring's Sea is a mare sslausum upon which the seizure of foreign vessels for violating our Revenue Laws proceeds seems to be untenable. We contended that it was not when Russia owned all the territory on both sides of it. Now that we own half and Russia half, it seems impossible to maintain the mare clausum theory.'" What course of action will be followed by the people here is not yet determined, but some steps should be taken by the Local and Civic Governments in order to convey the deep feeling of indignation entertained against the repeated acts of lawlessness on the part of the American authorities, and their regret that better protection is not afforded our fishing interests. A. Laing, mate of the " W. P. Sayward," arrived down from Nanaimo last evening,, having left the "Idaho " at that point. He corroborates the fact that the "Rush " was, ■entering Sitka as the steamer left, having in charge a number of schooners, the names of which were unknown. The Americans evidently intend to make a clean sweep of the schooners sealing nouth this season. Portions of the crews of the seized schoqnei6»are on the " Idaho " and wilkarrive over from Port Townsend to-day. A number of sailors and Indians have started for Victoria in boats. 88 It was reported that Captain Miner, of the schooner " Penelope," had overpowered the men put on his schooner as a prize crew, and was now on his way to Victoria with his unwilling passengers. No. 53. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, September 10, 1887. BY a despatch of the 30th October last the late Earl of Iddesleigh instructed you to call the attention of the United States' Secretary of State to the circumstances of the seizure in Behring's Sea, by the American cruizer " Corwin," of some British Canadian vessels; and his Lordship directed you to state to Mr. Secretary Bayard that Her Majesty's Government felt sure that if the proceedings which were reported to have taken place in the United States' District Court were correctly described, the United States' Government would admit their illegality, and would cause- reasonable reparation to be made to the British subjects for the wrongs to which they had been subjected and for the losses which they had sustained. By a previous despatch of the -9th September you had been desired to ask to be furnished with any particulars which the United States' Government might possess relative to the seizures in question; and on the 20th October you were instructed to enter a protest on behalf of Her Majesty's Government, and reserve for consideration hereafter all' rights to compensation. Nearly four months having elapsed without any definite information being furnished by the United States' Government as to the grounds of the seizures, my predecessor instructed you, on the 8th January last, to express to Mr. Bayard the concern of Her Majesty's Government at the delay, and to urge the immediate attention of the United States' Government to the action of the American authorities in their treatment of these vessels and of their masters and crews. On the 3rd February Mr. Bayard informed you that the record of the judicial proceedings which he had called for was shortly expected to reach Washington, and that, without conclusion at that time of any questions which might be found to be involved in these cases of seizures, orders had been issued by the President's direction for the discontinuance of all pending- proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith. On the 4th April, under instructions from me, you inquired of Mr. Bayard, in view of the approaching fishing season in Behring's Sea, whether the owners of British vessels might rely when not near land on being unmolested by the cruizers of the United States, and you again asked when the record of the judicial .proceedings- might be expected. Mr. Bayard informed you, in reply (12th April), that the papers referred to had reached him and were being examined; that there had been unavoidable delay in framing appropriate Regulations and issuing orders to the United States' vessels to police the Alaskan waters; that the Revised Statutes relating to- Alaska, Sections 1956 and 1971, contained- the Laws of the United States in relation to the matter; and that the Regulations were being considered, and he would inform you at the earliest day possible what had been decided, so that British and other vessels might govern themselves accordingly. In view of the statements made by Mr. Bayard in his note of the 3rd February, to which I have referred above, Her Majesty's Government assumed that, pending a conclusion of the discussion between the two Governments on the general question involved, no further similar seizures of British vessels would be made by order of the United States' Government. They learn, however, from the contents of Mr. Bayard's note of the 13th August last, inclosed in your despatch of the 15th August, that such was not the meaning which he intended should be attached to his communication of the 3rd February; and they deeply regret to find a proof of their misinterpretation of the intentions of the United States' Government from an announcement recently received from the Commander-in-chief of Her Majesty's naval forces in the Pacific, that several more British vessels engaged in seal-hunting in Behring's Sea have been seized When a long distance from land by an American Revenue vessel. Her Majesty's Government have carefully considered the transcript of record of the judicial proceedings in .the "United States' District Court in the several cases of the schooners "Carolina," "Onward," and " Thornton.'.. which lwe communicated 89 to you in July, and were transmitted to me in your despatch of the 18th of that month, and they cannot find in them any justification for the condemnation of those vessels. The libels Of information allege that they were seized for killing fur-seal within the limits of Alaska Territory, and in the waters thereof, in violation of Section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States; and the United States' Naval Commander Abbey certainly affirmed that the vessels were seized within the waters of Alaska and the Territory of Alaska; but according to his own evidence they were seized 75,115, and 70 miles respectively south-south-east of St. George's Island. It is not disputed, therefore, that the seizures in question were effected at a distance from land far in excess of the limit of maritime jurisdiction which any nation can claim by international law, and it is hardly necessary to add that such limit cannot be enlarged by any municipal law. The churn thus set up appears to be founded on the exceptional title said to have been conveyed to the United States by Russia at the time of the cession of the Alaska Territory. The pretension which the Russian Government at one timo put forward to exclusive jurisdiction over the whole of Behring's Sea was, however, never admitted either by this country or by the United States of America. On the contrary, it was strenuously resisted, as I shall presently show, and the American Government can hardly claim to have received from Russia rights which they declared to be inad- missible when asserted by the Russian Government. Nor does it appear from the text of the Treaty of 1867 that Russia either intended or purported to make any such grant; for, by Article I of that instrument, Russia agreed, to cede to the United States all the territory and dominion then possessed by Russia " on the Continent of America and in the adjacent islands " within certain geographical limits described, and no mention was made of any exclusive right over the waters of Behring's Sea. Moreover, whatever rights as regards their respective subjects and citizens may be reciprocaUy conferred on the Russian and American Governments by Treaty stipulation, the subjects of Her Majesty cannot be thereby affected, except by special arrangement with this country. With regard to the exclusive claims advanced in times past by Russia, I transmit to you documents communicated to the United States' Congress by President Monroe in 1822, which show the view taken by the American Government of these pretensions. In 1821 the Emperor of Russia had issued an Edict establishing " Rules for the limits of navigation and order of communication along the coast of the Eastern Siberia, the north-western coast of America, and the Aleutian, Kurile, and other islands." The first section of that Edict said: " The pursuit of commerce, whaling, and fishery, and of aU other industry on aU islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of northern latitude; also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring's Straits to the south Cape of the Island of Urup, viz., to the 45° 50' of northern latitude, is exclusively granted to Russian subjects ;" and section 2 stated : " It is, therefore, prohibited to all foreign vessels not only to land on the coast and islands belonging to Russia, as stated above, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The transgressor's vessel is subject to confiscation, along with the whole cargo." A copy of these Regulations was officially communicated to the American Secretary of State by the Russian Minister at Washington on the 11th February, 1822; whereupon Mr. Quincy Adams, on the 25th of that month, after mformrng him that the President of the United States had seen with surprise the assertion of a territorial claim on the part of Russia, extending to the 51st degree of north latitude on the American Continent, and a Regulation interdicting to all commercial vessels other than Russian, upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation, the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores to which that claim was made to apply, went on to say that it was expected before any act which should define the boundary between the territories of the United States and Russia, that the same would have been arranged by Treaty between the parties, and that " to exclude the vessels of American citizens from the shore beyond the ordinary distance to which territorial jurisdiction extends has excited still greater surprise;" and Mr. Adams asked whether the: Russian Minister was authorized to give explanations of the upon principles generally recognized by warrant the claims and Regulations." [1281 the laws and grounds of right, nations, which can N 90 iff The Russian, Minister, in hisirepSy, dated the 28th February, after explaining how Russia had acquired her possessions in North America, said :— " I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, Sir, that the Russian- possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend on the north-west coast of America from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude,, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent from the; same Strait to the 45th degree. The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas (' mers ferme'es'), and the Russian Government might consequently judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especially that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners ; but it preferred only asserting its essential rights without taking advantage of localities." On the 30th March Mr. Adams replied to the explanations given by the Russian Minister. He stated that, with respect to the pretension advanced in regard to terri* tory, it must.be considered not only with reference to the question of territorial rights, but also to that prohibition to the vessels of other nations, including those of the United States, to approach within 100 Italian miles of the coasts. That from the period of the existence of the United States as an independent nation their vessels had freely navigated these seas, the right to navigate them being a part of that independence; and with regard to the suggestion that " the Russian Government might have justified the exercise of sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea, j because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores,' it may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea, in latitude 51° north, is not less than ninety degrees of longitude, or 4,000 miles." Mr. Adams concluded as follows: "The President is persuaded that the citizens of this Union will remain unmolested in the prosecution of their lawful commerce, and that no effect will be given to an interdiction manifestly incompatible with their rights." The Convention between the United States of America and Russia of the 17th April, 1824, put an end to any further pretension on the part of Russia to restrict navigation or fishing in Behring's Sea so far as American citizens were concerned; for by Article I it was agreed that in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shall neither be disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or fishing, saving certain Testrictions which are not material to the present issue; and a similar stipulation in the Convention between this country and Russia in the following year (15th May, 1825) put an end, as regarded British subjects, to the pretensions of Russia to which I have referred, and which had been entirely repudiated by Her Majesty's Government in correspondence with the Russian Government in 1821 -and 1822, which for your more particular information I inclose herein. Her Majesty's Government feel sure that, in view of the considerations which I have set forth in this despatch, which you Avill communicate to Mr. Bayard, the Government of the United States wall admit that the seizure and' condemnation of these British vessels, and the imprisonment of their masters and crews, wrere not warranted by the circumstances, and that they will be ready to afford reasonable ■compensation to those who have suffered in consequence, and issue immediate instructions to their naval officers which will rprevent a recurrence of these regrettable incidents. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. • No. 54. Sir H. Holland to the Marquis of Lansdowne. My Lord, Downing Street, September 14, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I have the honour to acquaint you, for the information of your Ministers, that the Marquis of Salisbury caused to be referred to the Law Officers the correspondence which has passed repecting the seizure of the three British sealing-vessels, the "Thornton," the "Carolina," and the "Onward," by the United States' Revenue cruizer "Corwin," in.Behring's Sea, and that they advised that a claim for compensation might properly be made against the United States' Government. I telegraphed to you on the 7th instant that it was proposed to prefer a claim for compensation against the United States' Government, and inquiring what amount your 91 Ministers would suggest; but as at present advised it does'-trot seem to me desirabliMBo put forward the claims which accompanied your despatch of the 15th January, as some of them are apparently much exaggerated, and a new issue would be raised as to the reasonableness of the claims. In the meantime, the Marquis of Salisbury has addressed the despatch, of which 1 inclose a copy,* to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, desiring him to communicate it to the Secretary of State. Your Ministers will no doubt take this matter into consideration at the earliest moment. I have, &c. (Signed) H. T. HOLLAND. No. 55. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received September 15.) My Lord, Washington, September 6, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith an article from the "New York Times " on maritime jurisdiction in Behring's Sea. I have &c (Signed) ' L.' S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 55. Extract from the " Neiv York Times" of September 5, 1887. A Disputed Ocean.—When the new Fisheries "Commission," as Mr. Bayard insists it should not be called, was first announced in Parliament, it was said that its scope would be limited to the controversy between Canada and the United States. But in response to Mr. Gourlay's inquiry, it was subsequently added that the question of including the Alaska seal fisheries was under consideration. It is therefore none too early for public opinion to begin seriously to shape itself on a question about which much less has been said than in the interminable codfish squabble, it is, moreover, a very pretty question in itself, that of our rights in Behring's 'Sea, and involves issues of no slight intrinsic value. As everybody knows, Russia regarded Behring's Sea as hers, just as we regard Delaware and Chesapeake Bays as ours, to compare little things with big. Then Russia ceded jto us the coast on one side of this little ocean,, together with one-half the ocean itself. Next, Congress sold the right of catching seals in what we will call " our " part of that ocean. And now the question of our'rights arises upon the catching red-handed poachers who happen to be British. It is intimated that Russia could not convey to us what she did not own herself, and that when we bought Alaska we took in fact much less than the deed, that is the Treaty, recited. The merits of the question are of course involved in Russia's rights. Her exclusive rights were not conceded, but, on the contrary, were promptly attacked when they were announced in the Ukase of 1821. The title was thus clouded, but it was not invalidated. Russia's last word was that, although she did not care to argue about her rights, whoever invaded them .did so at his peril. Instead of quarrelling, Russia and the United States, agreed that the citizens of both countries should have unrestrained privileges in those waters. In other words, although Russia's right of exclusion of Americans was disputed, it was deemed good enough by us in 1824 to be the basis of a bargain. Great Britain made a similar Treaty the next year. The British Treaty is still in force, we suppose, over the western, or Russian, half of Behring's Sea. Great Britain's rights in the western half are therefore based on the same title as ours in the eastern. She cannot admit the rights of the Czar and deny those of the United States. On the other hand, the United States are not thus involved. We protested against the pretensions of the Czar because they injured American commerce. But, having acquired the Czar's asserted rights by purchase, we are now as much interested in defending them as we before were in attacking them. At the very least we can require that whoever questions those rights should come into Court with clean hands. That means much in connection with this topic, as can readily be made clear. * No. 53. [128] N 2 ■■• ■' 92 Russia's rights are attacked on the very simple ground that she might as well have annexed the open ocean as Behring's Sea. Russia?s position was that the Aleutian Isles, scattered along in a chain between Asia and America, cut off that northern portion of the Pacific Ocean and made it an interior sea, like Hudson's Bay, in British North America, or like the Gulf of California. The claim would be more readily conceded if the Aleutian Isles were more contiguous. As matter of fact, 900 miles of blue water separate the westernmost island from the most eastern extension of Russian mainland. But between the two most separated islands the distance, it must be admitted, is considerably less. Still, it would be enough to overthrow the mare clausum theory were the attack made by any other nation than England. That "closed sea" theory is briefly an agreement among nations that so many of them as have sea-coasts may annex so much of the ocean as they can control, and control is construed to extend as far as a cannon-ball can reach. That is the antiquated theory on which exclusive maritime jurisdiction is conceded by nations to one another over the ocean 3 miles from shore. Of course, if two capes were only 3 miles apart the interior sea beyond them would, on the strict mare clausum contention, be conceded to the nation owning the capes, but not otherwise. But neither England nor the United States should push this closed sea argument too hard or too far. England once claimed to own the entire ocean surrounding the British Isles, and in 1806 the United States thought it ought to be conceded a right to exclude belligerents from the Atlantic Ocean between the Gulf Stream and the mainland. To abandon extreme positions and come down to the contentions of to-day, England, which denies to Russia the right to define its possessions by imaginary lines drawn from island to island, assumes to itself the right to exclude Americans from the open ocean included by an imaginary line from headland to headland. Who seeks equity must do equity. The English must not both keep their codfish and grab our seals. On the other hand, by the strictest technical argument it might be that we could both keep what Russia sold us and get what England unjustly denies us. Secretary Bayard has given abundant intimation of his opinion that a plenary Council would limit the rights which the Czar assumed to convey to us. It is given out that the proper thing would be to arrange upon rules for all to observe regarding seal-fishing. Perhaps so. But that leaves the dispute of right and title untouched, and who can say in what form it may return to plague us ? Moreover, while Americans are doubtless prepared to yield what others justly claim, still, there should be no surrender before challenge. ' No. 56. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, September 15, 1887. IT appears from the transcript of the record of the judicial proceedings in the cases of the schooners "Carolina," "Onward," and "Thornton," forwarded in your despatch of the 12th July last, that in each case notice was given of appeal from the finding of the District Court. I have to request that you will ascertain whether the owners of the vessels have taken steps to prosecute the appeal, and if so, when such appeal may be expected to come on for hearing. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY No. 57. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 16.) Sir, Downing Street, September 15, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of two despatches from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding papers respecting the recent seizure of British sealing-vessels bv a United States' Revenue cutter in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. 93 Inclosure 1 in No. 57. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, New Derreen, New Richmond, P.Q., August 19, 1887- I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith, for your information, copies of a Report which has been received by my Minister of Marine and Fisheries from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, in regard to the seizure of the sealers " Grace," "Dolphin," and " W. P. Sayward" by the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush." 2. I beg to call your especial attention to the deposition inclosed in Mr. Hamley's Report of Captain Laing, of the " W. P. Sayward." You will observe that Captain Laing states positively that the seals of which the skins were found on board his vessel were not taken in the Behring's Sea. 3. It is scarcely necessary to dwell upon the grievous hardship occasioned by these seizures, for which, as far as I am aware, no justification has yet been forthcoming, not only to the owners and to the officers and crews, but to the Indian hunters on board who were, it appears, left to find their way home as they could from Sitka to their own villages, distant about 700 miles from that place. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE Inclosure 2 in No. 57. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, The Citadel, Quebec, August 27, 1887. WITH reference to my despatch of the 19th instant, in regard to the seizure of the sealers " Grace," " Dolphin," and " W. P. Sayward " by the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush," I have the honour to forward herewith copy of an approved. Minute of the Privy Council of Canada, to which are appended copies of the following documents :■— 1. A letter from H. Hamley, Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. 2. The affidavit of Andrew Laing, mate of the seized schooner " Sayward," sworn to at Victoria on the 8th August, 1887. 3. The information filed in the District Court of. the United States for the District of Alaska against the master and mate of the " Sayward." It is requested that these papers, copies of which were inclosed in my above- mentioned despatch, may be transmitted to the Foreign Office, in order that u remonstrance may be addressed to the United States' Government against the unwarrantable action of the Commander of the "Rush," and a claim made for all damages arising from the seizure of the "Sayward," and the detention of her officers and crew. T have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 3 in No. 57. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on August 23, 1887. ON a Report, dated the 17th August, 1887, from the Minister of Marine and l'isheries, submitting, with reference to the seizure by the United States' steamer " Richard Rush " on the 9th July last, in the Behring's Sea, of the British schooner " W. P. Sayward," of Victoria, the following papers :— 1. A letter from W. Hamley, Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries ; 2. The affidavit of Andrew Laing, mate of the seized schooner, sworn to at Victoria on the 8th August, 1887 ; and 3. The information filed in the District Court of the United States for the District of Alaska against the master and mate of the " Sayward;" The Minister observes that, upon reference to the affidavit of the mate of the schooner 94 " Sayward," it appears that all the seals on board the vessel were taken in the Pacific Ocean, and before the vessel entered the Behring's Sea, so that even the alleged claim on the part of the United States' Government to jurisdiction in the Behring's Sea is not available in the case now complained of; and would also call attention to the reply of the Commander of the United States' steamer "Richard Rush," in which he states his orders were "to take everything he came across in the Behring's Sea." The Committee recommend that your Excellency be moved to forward copies of the annexed papers to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the Foreign Office, in order that a remonstrance may be made to the United States' Government for so unwarrantable an act as that committed by the Commander of the " Richard Rush," and a claim made for all damages arising out of the seizure of the schooner " W. P. Sayward" in the open sea, and the detention of her officers and crew, and also that copies of the papers be sent to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 4 in No. 57. Mr. Hamley to the Hon. G. E. Foster. Sir, Custom-House, Victoria, August 9, 1887. ON the 5th* instant I sent you word by telegram that three more Canadian vessels had been seized in Behring's Sea, and sent to Sitka, "Grace," "Dolphin,'' and "W. P. Sayward." This news reached us by the steamer " Olympian," and, the day following, the mate of the " W. P. Sayward," one of the seized vessels, came down on the steamer "Idaho." I had him here at the custom-house, and his statement in some particulars was so important that I thought it desirable that it should be taken down before a notary public, and the deposition forwarded to you. I inclose it herewith. The seizure was made on the 9th July by the master of the Revenue cutter " Rush " in Behring's Sea, from 30 to 40 miles from any land; the mate denies that any seal was killed in Behring's Sea; the skins, 479 in number, all taken, he says, in the Pacific, were lodged in the Alaska Company's warehouse at Ounalaska, and the vessel herself sent to Sitka. There is no doubt now, from the declaration of the master of the United States' Revenue cutter made openly on the deck of the " W. P. Sayward," that, in seizing this and other Canadian vessels, he was acting under direct instructions from the United States' Government. I forward also the information laid in the District Court at Sitka by the United States' Attorney Bali against the master and mate of the " W. P. Sayward." The indictments against the masters and mates of the other vessels are in the same form and terms—the complaint being that they had killed fur-seals in Behring's Sea, contrary to the Statutes of the United States, and against the peace and dignity of the United States of America. The case is to be heard in the District Court at Sitka on the 22nd of this month. The mate of the " W. P. Sayward" was allowed out on bail in 500 dollars, and returned last night for the trial. I have, &c. (Signed) W. HAMLEY. Inclosure 5 in No. 57. Declaration of Andrew Laing. [See Inclosure 3 in No. 52.] 95' Inclosure 6 in No. 57. In the District Court of the United States for the District of Alaska. The United States, v. George R. Ferry and A. Laing.—Information. [See Inclosure 2 in No. 52.] No. 58. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 26.) Sir, Downing Street, September 24,1887. WITH reference to recent correspondence, I am directed by Secretary Sir Henry Holland to transmit to you, for such action upon it as the Marquis of Salisbury may think proper to take, a telegram received this day from the Governor-General of Canada, relating to the question of the release of the British Columbian sealing-vessels seized by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea. This telegram appears to relate to the vessels seized last year. I am to request to be informed of any communication which may be made to the United States' Government in order that a reply may be sent to the Governor-General. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 58. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Colonial Office. (Telegraphic.) September 23, 1887. I UNDERSTAND that, after Mr: Bayard's announcement of the 3rd February respecting Behring's Sea seizures, instructions were sent in accordance with it to the Alaska authorities by telegraph; that an instrument for the release of the vessels was thereupon issued by the District Judge, but that subsequently, on the assumption that the telegram was forged, he rescinded the order; that no steps have been taken by the Department since; the vessels are still detained. My Government trusts the facts will be inquired into. No. 59. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir,. Foreign Office, September 27, 1887. I TRANSMIT to you, for your information, a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office,* inclosing a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, from which it appears that the British schooners "Carolina," "Onward," and "Thornton," referred to in your despatch of the 4th February last, have not yet been released. In his note of the 3rd February, inclosed in your above-mentioned despatch, Mr. Bayard stated that " orders have been issued, by the President's direction, for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith." Her Majesty's Government regret to learn that delay has taken place in the release of the three vessels, and I have to instruct you to inquire the reason why the directions of the President, as above quoted, have not been carried out. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. * No. 58. ggjgjggggggg 96 No. 60. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, September 27, 1887. I TRANSMIT to you herewith copies of two despatches addressed to Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies by the Governor-General of Canada,* forwarding papers relative to the seizure in Behring's Sea by the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush" of three British Colombian vessels, the " Grace," the " Dolphin," and the | W. P. Sayward." I have to request that you will make a representation to the United States' Government on the subject of the seizure and detention of these vessels in connection with the representations which I instructed you to make in the cases of the "Onward," the " Carolina," and the "Thornton," and that you will reserve all rights to compensation on behalf of the owners and crews. You should point out to Mr. Bayard that in the case of the "W. P. Sayward," according to the deposition of her mate no seals had been taken by her crew in Behring's Sea as is alleged in the libel of information filed on behalf of the United States' District Attorney in the District Court of Alaska. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 61. Memorandum communicated by Baron Plessen, October 5, 1887. THE Imperial Government would like to know what are the views of Her Britannic Majesty's Government with regard to the American proposal for an International Convention for the protection of seals in the Behring's Sea. m\. No. 62. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 6.) (Extract.) Washington, September 23, 1887. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's despatch of the 10th instant, and to inform your Lordship that I communicated it this day to the Secretary of State, and, at his request, left a copy of it in his hands. No. 63. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received October 6.) Sir, Admiralty, October 4, 1887. I AM commanded by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit, for the information of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, copy of a letter from the Commander-in-chief on the Pacific Station, dated the 14th September, inclosing a list of the schooners that have been sealing, extracted from the | Victoria Colonist " newspaper, dated the 13th September. A similar letter has been sent to the Colonial Office. I am, &c. (Signed) EVAN MACGREGOR. Inclosure 1 in No. 63. Rear-Admiral Culme-Seymour to Admiralty. S ir, " Triumph," at Esquimalt, September 14, 1887. THE sealing season being now over, I have the honour to inclose a list of the schooners that have been sealing, cut from the " Victoria Colonist | of yesterday's date. It is not yet known whether the five vessels " to arrive " have been seized or not, but they are overdue here. * Inclosures in No. 57. 97 With reference to the schooner "Alfred Adams," I am credibly informed she was boarded by the American Revenue schooner in Behring's Sea, her skins (1,300 in number) taken out, as well as her arms, and she was told to proceed to Sitka. No one being put oh board, the captian brought his vessel down here. No orders whatever have ever been received here with regard to the release of the schooners seized last year, which are now, I believe, high and dry at Ounalaska, worm' eaten and worthless. I have, &c. (Signed) M. CULME-SEYMOUR. Inclosure 2 in No. 63. Extract from the "Daily Colonist," Victoria, B. C, of September 13, 1887. List of Vessels Arrived, with their total Catch; those to Arrive; Schooners seized. THE following is the list of sealing schooners which have arrived in port with their northern catches; also those to arrive and those seized. The coast catch by Indians and the spring catch by American sealers disposed of in Victoria are also appended :— Vessels Akkived. Name. Spring Catch. Northern Catch. Total. Pathfinder 400 2,377 2,817 Penelope .. .. .. J,000 1,500 2,500 Mary Ellen 367 2,090 2,457 Lottie Fairfield .. .. 400 2,600 3,000 ' Mary Taylor .. .. 200 800 1,000 Mountain Chief .. 400 687 1,087 Black Diamond .. # , 964 Adela .. .. .. 164 P 1'350 1,514 Ada Kate Favourite Theresa Triumph Dolphin .. Grace Anna Beck .. W. P. Sayward Alfred Adams Vessels to Akkive. 349 1 | 1,030 807 21 I Vessels Seized. I 1,500 The number of seals caught by American schooners and sold in this city is as follows :— Helen Blum . Sylvia Handy San Jose City of San Diego Vanderhilt Discovery 436 139 197 200 617 250 The Neah Bay schooner "Lottie's" northern catch was disposed of the other day, and amounted to 700 skins. This makes the total catch, so far as could be gleaned yesterday, 19,046 skins by British vessels, and 2,539 skins disposed of by American schooners. The catch off the west coast by the Indians and sold to store-keepers was 500. The total number of skins brought into port for this season will represent in dollars, at 6 dol. 50 c. per skin, the handsome sum of 140,302 dol. 50 c. [128] O 98 m\ Mm i ''* if' ■ ■ KS* ' <-'.;' • i No. 64. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 10.) My Lord, Washington, September 28, 1887. IN pursuance of the instructions contained in your Lordship's telegram of yesterday's date, I have this day addressed a note to Mr. Bayard, copy of which is herewith inclosed, inquiring the reason for the non-release of the British vessels mentioned in his note of the 3rd February last. I also have the honour to transmit herewith to your Lordship copy of an extract from the | New York Tribune" of yesterday bearing on this point. I have, &c. . (Signed) L. S. SACKVILE WEST. Sir, Inclosure 1 in No. 64. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Washington, September 28, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform you that Her Majesty's Government have been officially informed that the British vessels mentioned in your note of the 3rd February last have not been released, and that I am instructed to inquire the reason for the delay in complying with the orders sent to this effect, as stated in your above-mentioned note. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST, j Inclosure 2 in No. 64. Extract from the "New York Tribune" of September 27, 1887. The Alaska Seizures. Ottawa, September 26, 1887. THE Government has just received the Report of Mr. Drake, Q.C., who was sent to Alaska to investigate matters in connection with the Behring's Sea seizures. The following is a copy of the despatch addressed to Judge Lafayette Dawson and Colonel Ball, United States' District Attorney at Sitka, which has not been carried out to this day, and in respect to which the Canadian Government has recently sent a. strong protest to the mother-country for transmission to Washington:— " Washington, January 26, 1887. " I am directed by the President to instruct you to discontinue all proceedings in the matter of seizure of the British vessels 'Carolina,' 'Onward,' and 'Thornton,' and to discharge all vessels now held under such seizures, and release all persons that may be under arrest in connection therewith. (Signed) "A. H. Garland, Attorney-General." Judge Dawson thereupon issued an order to Marshal Atkins to release the vessels, but, as stated in previous despatches, afterwards withdrew it on the representation, Mr. Drake says, of Atkins, and against the express opinion of Colonel Ball. A record of the original instructions appears on the books of the District Court, but there is no record of their withdrawal. The "Onward," "Carolina," and "Thornton" are still beached at Ounalaska, and cannot be removed without considerable expense. The skins taken on these vessels were sent to San Francisco by a steamer belonging to the Alaska Commercial Company. Mr. Drake says he cannot find that there was any authority given by the United States' Government for seizures made last year, but that they seem to have been made at the instance and in the interests of the Commercial Company. No. 65. Note from United States' Minister at Stockholm to Swedish Government.—(Communicated by M. d'Adelborg, October 10, 1887.) THE Government of the United States recognizes the necessity of taking steps for the better protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring's Strait. The indiscriminate and unregulated killing of these valuable animals has of late years greatly reduced their number, and threatens in a comparatively short time to all but extinguish them. 99 The importance of respective Governments entering into an arrangement which shall have for its purpose the regulation of seal-hunting and to the present indiscriminate slaughter of seals, is so apparent that it needs no elaboration. To this end I am directed to invite the United Kingdoms Of Sweden and Norway to enter into such an arrangement with the Government of the United States as will prevent the citizens of either country from killing seal in Behring's Sea in such times and places and by such methods as at present are pursued. ,„,The Governments of Germany, Great Britain, Russia, France, and Japan, have like- wisebeen invited to co-operate to this end. No. 66. The Marquis of Salisbury to M. d'Adelborg. THE Marquis of Salisbury has had the honour to receive the copy of a communication addressed to the Swedish Government by the United States' Minister at Stockholm which Count Adelborg has been good enough to leave at the Foreign Office. Her Majesty's Government have not received any similar communication from the Government of the United States regarding the protection of the fur-seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. Lord Salisbury would, however, be glad to know whether the invitation to enter into an arrangement on the subject will be accepted by the Swedish Government. Foreign Office, October 11, ls87. No. 67. Foreign Office to Baron Plessen. SIR J. PAUNCEFOTE has the honour to inform Baron Plessen, with reference to his inquiry of the 5th instant, that no proposal has been made to Her Majesty's Government by the Government of the United States for an International Convention for the protection of seals in Behring's Sea. The Marquis of Salisbury would be glad to be informed of the decision which may be adopted in the matter by the German Government. Foreign Office, October 11, 1887. No. 68. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received October 14.) Sir, Admiralty, October 13, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of sealing schooners, I am commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit, for the information of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, copy of a letter from the Commander-in-chief on the Pacific Station dated the 23rd September, forwarding an extract from the "Victoria Daily Times" of Monday, the !9th September, 1887, containing a demurrer handed in at Sitka by Mr. M. W. T. Drake, Q.C., who was sent to Sitka by the Dominion Government of Canada. I am to request that the newspaper extracts may be forwarded to the Colonial Office for the perusal of Secretary Sir Henry Holland, with a request that they may be returned to the Admiralty when done with. I am, &c. (Signed) EVAN MACGREGOR. Inclosure 1 in No. 68. Rear-Admiral Seymour to Admiralty. Sir, " Triumph," at Esquimalt, September 23, 1887. REFERRING to the capture of sealing schooners by the American Government, I have the honour to forward a copy of a demurrer handed in at Sitka by Mr. M. W. T. Drake, Q.C., of Victoria, who was sent to Sitka bv the Dominion Government of Canada. [12S] O 2 ■.ii.-in.Twujiiim ■MULW 100 2. It would appear by Lord Salisbury's despatch of the 10th August, 1887, that orders were given for the schooners seized in 1886 to be released, and I am informed a telegram to that effect was received at Sitka ; nothing was done, and the vessels are, as stated in my letter of the 14th instant, high and dry at Ounalaska, and I am credibly informed so wormeaten and damaged as hardly to be worth removal. Certainly no information has ever been received by any authority here, or by the owners of the schooners seized in 1886, that they were to be released. 3. With regard to the vessels seized this year, the crews have been released and one, of the schooners has been chartered by the authorities at Sitka to proceed to Ounalaska and bring the skins taken out of the schooners seized this year and landed at the latter place, to Sitka. The trials will probably take place at Sitka about this time. I have, &c. (Signed) M. CULME SEYMOUR. Inclosure 2 in No 68. Extract from the " Victoria Daily Times" of September 19, 1887. AT present the seizure of the Victoria seal-hunting schooners with their officers, crew, and hunters is the topic of the hour in this city. Mr. Drake's demurrer, the full text of which is herewith given, will be read with especial interest:— "Brief of Mr. M. W. T. Drake, Q.C. " (Filed on behalf of the officers of the British sealers.) I United States' Court, District of Alaska. \ " The United States, Plaintiff, v. J. D. Warren and J. C. Riley, defendants. " Brief in support of the demurrer filed herein the 30th August, 1887, on behalf of the masters and owners of the British schooners ' Anna Beck,' ' Dolphin,' ' Grace,' and | W. P. Sayward,' seized by the United States' cutter for an alleged infraction of an Act of the United States' Congress No. 120, being an Act to prevent the extermination of fur- bearing animals in Alaska. The Act is directly against killing seals in the waters adjacent to the islands of St. Paul and St. George and does not refer to any other waters in Behring's Sea, but on referring to section 1956 of the Revised Statutes, the language used is somewhat different, prohibiting the killing of fur-bearing animals within the limits of Alaska Territory or the waters thereof. The first question then to be decided is what is meant by | the waters thereof.' If the defendants are bound by the Treaty between the United States and Russia ceding Alaska to the United States, then it appears that Russia in 1822 claimed absolute territorial sovereignty over the Behring's Sea and purported to convey practically one half of that sea to the United States, but are the defendants as men belonging to a country on friendly terms with the United States bound by this assertion of Russia % And can the United States claim that the Treaty conveys to them any greater right than Russia herself possessed in these waters ? In other words, the mere assertion of a right contrary to the comity of nations can confer on the grantees no rights in excess of those recognized by the law of nations. " Rights of Great Britain and the United States. " In inquiring what that right was and how far it was submitted to by the other Powers' interested, namely, Great Britain and the United States, we find the United States' Minister at-St. Petersburgh in 1822 combatting the pretensions of Russia to a jurisdiction over the waters of Behring's Sea for a distance of 100 miles from the coast (for this was the extent of Russia's claim in 1822) in the following expressive language: 'The existence of territorial rights to the distance of 100 miles from the coast and the prohibition of approaching to the same distance from these coasts and from those of all intervening islands are innovations on the law of nations and measures unexampled.' We thus find that the assumption of a limited sovereignty over the waters of Alaska was challenged by the United States, and in consequence was not persisted in, and on the 17th April, 1824, a Convention was concluded between the United States and Russia, whereby it was agreed, ' that in any part of the great ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens, subjects of the High Contracting Powers, should be neither disturbed 101 or restrained either in navigation or in fishing or in the power of resorting to the coasts upon points which might not then have been already occupied for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions contained in certain Articles attached to the Treaty referring to illicit trade with the Indians.' " A Treaty with Russia. | The Government of Great Britain, on the 28th February, 1825, also entered into a Treaty with Russia in consequence of the same extravagant pretensions of Russia, Which Treaty contains the following provisions : ' 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, in 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 then following Articles.' These restrictions are not dissimlar from those attached to the Treaty with the United States. In order to ascertain what were the pretensions of Russia which led to these Treaties it is necessary to refer to the Edict of the Autocrat of all the Russias. By Section 1 it is enacted : i That the pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing,, and all other industries on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Behring's Straits to 51° of north latitude, also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring's Straits to the south Cape of the Island of Uruck, namely, 45° 50' northern latitude is exclusively granted to Russian subjects.' "Russia's Claims. " Section 2.—' It is therefore prohibited to all foreign vessels not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging, to Russia, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The trangressor's vessel is subject to confiscation along with the whole cargo.' Thus it appears that Russia claimed 100 miles from the coast of all the islands as well as the mainland of Behring's Sea and south to 45° 50'. It was this claim that led to the indignant remonstrance of the United States and Great Britain, and to the Treaties before referred to, and shows that Behring's Sea was included in the term Pacific Ocean. The pretensions of Russia were never revived, and the citizens of Great Britain as well as the United States had free access at all times to these waters in navigating and fishing without any restriction. And Russia's claim was never revived until she purported to cede to the United States a portion of Behring's Sea. Russia could not sell what she did not own, and the United States could not claim that which it was not in the power of Russia to sell. The Treaty with England has never been abrogated, and was in force when the cession to the United States took place, and there was no need to protest against the extravagant pretensions of Russia in purporting to dispose of the high seas, as until last year no attempt had been made to enforce such a claim. i Authorities quoted. " The United States have always been the strongest upholders of the law of nations, and on this head Kent's Commentaries, p. 28: ' The open sea is not capable of being possessed as private property; the free use of the ocean for navigation and fishing is common to all mankind, and the public jurists generally and explicitly deny that the main ocean can ever be appropriated.' He also refers to the claim of Russia, and in another place he states that the ' United States have recognized the limitation of a marine league for general territorial jurisdiction by authorizing the District Courts to take cognizance of all captures made within a marine league of the American shore.' (See Act of Congress, June 5, 1794.) " And in Wharton's ' International Law Digest,' p. 32, the author says, ' The limit of 1 sea league from shore is provisionally adopted as that of the territorial sea of the United States,' and ' our jurisdiction has been fixed to extend 3 geographical miles from our shores, with the exception of any waters or bays which are so landlocked as to he unquestionably within the jurisdiction of the United States, be their extent what they may.' Behring's Sea is not a gulf or a bay, and is not landlocked by the lands of the United States. " Secretary Seward's Views. " Wharton again states that ' a vessel on the high seas bevond the distance of a ■marine league from the shore is regarded as part of the territory of the nation to which ' and Mr. Seward, in a letter to Mr. Tassara, 16th December, 1862, tersely she belongs I 102 states the principle as follows : ' There are two principles bearing on the subject which are universallv admitted: (1) that the sea is open to all nations; and (2) that there is a portion of the sea adjacent to every nation over which the. sovereignty of that nation extends, to the exclusion of every other political authority. A third principle bearing on the subject is that the exclusive sovereignty of a nation abridging the universal liberty of the seas extends no further than the power of the nation to maintain it by force stationed on the coast extends.' " ' Terrse dominium * vis.' (The sovereignty of the coast ends where the power to control it by force of arms terminates.) It thus appears that by the comity of nations, sanctioned and approved by American jurists, that the high seas are open to all; that the territorial authority only extends to a marine league, or, at all events, not further than a force on shore can protect the coasts. " Sovereignty claimed by the United States. " It also appears that the United States, in claiming sovereignty over the Behring's Sea, is claiming something beyond the well recognized law of nations, and bases her claim upon the pretensions of Russia, which was successfully repudiated by both Great Britain and the United States. A Treaty is valid and binding between the parties to it, but it cannot affect others who are not parties to it. It is an agreement between nations, and Would be construed by law as an agreement between individuals. Great Britain was no party to it, and therefore was not bound by its terms. " It is therefore contended that the proceedings taken against the present defendants are ultra vires and without jurisdiction. But in order to press the matter further, it may be necessary to discuss the act itself under which the alleged jurisdiction is assumed. The Act must be construed by what appears within its four corners, and not by any extrinsic document. It is an Act defining a criminal offence, and an Act which abridges the privileges and immunities of citizens must be most strictly construed, and nothing but the clearest expression can or ought to be construed against the interest of the public in applying this principle to the present case. The terms used in the Act itself are, 'The waters adjacent to the Islands of St. George and St. Paul.' ' Adjacent,' in Wharton, p. 846, is held to be adjacent to the coast, and within the territorial jurisdiction of the country. This language, then, does not apply to these defendants, who were 50 miles from the nearest coast. In section 1956 the language is, ' the waters of Alaska.' This must also be construed by the universal law as applying to the territorial limit only. And in a letter from Mr. Evarts to Mr. Foster, in April 1879, referring to a case in which certain American merchant-vessels were seized by the Mexican authorities for an alleged breach of the Revenue Laws, although distant more than 3 miles from shore, it was held to be an international offence, and was not cured by a Decree in favour of the assailants by the Mexican Court. " So here it is submitted that a Decree of your Honour's Court will not give any validity to the seizures here made, and the defendants, in filing their demurrer and submitting this argument, do not thereby waive their rights or submit to the jurisdiction of the Court." No. 69. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Substance telegraphed, October i4.) My Lord, Washington, October 14, 1887. WITH reference to the note from the Secretary of State, copy of which was inclosed in my despatch of the 12th instant,* I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a further reply to my note of the 28th ultimo, expressing regret that misconception of the intentions and orders of the President for the release of the sealers "Onward," "Carolina," and "Thornton" should have delayed their• prompt execution, and stating that renewed orders have been forwarded. I have communicated copy of this note to the Marquis of Lansdowne, the sub-- stauce of which I telegraphed to your Lordship this day. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. * Sre No. 73. 103 Inclosure in No. 69. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, October 13, 1887. CONTINUING my reply to your note of the 29th ultimo, inquiring the reason for the delay in complying with the order issued in January last for the release of British vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea, I beg leave to inform you that I have this day received a communication from my colleague the Attorney-General, informing me that his telegram to the United States' Marshal at Sitka of the DO 26th January last, ordering the release of the British schooners "Onward, " Carolina," and " Thornton," owing to some misconception and mistake on the part of the official to whom it had been addressed had not been acted upon. A renewed order has gone forward for their release, as had been distinctly directed last January, and which I had no reason to doubt had been promptly obeyed. In my note to you of the 11th instant I stated it to be my impression that no hindrance to their repossession by the owners of the vessels named existed. This impression, it now appears, was not well founded, and as my object is to give you the fullest information within my power in relation to all transactions touched in our correspondence, I hasten to communicate the latest report made to me from the Department of Justice. I take leave also to express my regret that any misconception of the intentions and orders of the President should have delayed their prompt execution. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 70. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October J 8.) Sir, Downing Street, October 17, 1887. I AM directed by Secretary Sir H. Holland to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, dated the 26th September, wrth its inclosures, respecting the seizure in Behring's Sea of the British schooner " Alfred Adams." These papers appear to Sir H. Holland to point to a serious state of things, which seem to make it necessary that some decided action in the matter should be taken by Her Majesty's Government. And be would suggest, for the consideration of Lord Salisbury, whether it would not be desirable to instruct Sir L. West, unless he has already done so, formally to protest against the right assumed by the United States -of seizing vessels for Catching seals beyond the territorial waters of Alaska. I am to add Sir H. Holland makes this suggestion, as Mr. Bayard is reported in the newspapers to have stated that no protest against their right to seize had been made, and to have assumed, therefore, that Her Majesty's Government did not really dispute it. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 70. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. 'Sir, Citadel, Quebec, September 26, 1887. IN continuation of my despatch of the 27th August and in reference to previous* correspondence, I have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council of Canada, covering copies of a Report of my Minister of Marine and Fisheries relating to the seizure and detention of the Canadian sealing schooner " Alfred Adams," and of other Canadian sealing vessels by the United States' authorities in the Behring's Sea. 2. The letter directed to the United States' District Attorney at Sitka, marked D in the Minister's Report, which came into the possession of my Government under the circumstances described in the Declaration of Captain Dyer, of the " Alfred Adams," 104 -fU-t i -, m bias been forwarded, together with copies of the papers, to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. 3. The circumstances under which the "Adams" was seized do not differ materially from those attending previous seizures in the same waters. I have already laid before you the reasons which have led my Government to protest against the assumption that the Statutes under which other seizures, and I presume this also, have been made, Statutes governing the conduct of persons fishing within " the territory of Alaska" or "in the waters thereof" (vide United States' Revised Statutes, 1955, 1956), are applicable to the whole of the waters of the Behring's Sea, and in cases where, as in those under discussion, the vessels seized were found fishing at a great distance from the nearest land. 4. I trust that the earnest attention of Her Majesty's Government will be given to the statements contained in the Minister's Report. No satisfactory explanation has yet been given of the action of the United States' Government subsequent to Mr. Bayard's announcement of the 3rd February of the present year, when it was stated by him to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington that " orders had been issued by the President's direction for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of aU persons under arrest in connection therewith." 5. Tou will observe from Mr. Foster's recapitulation of the evidence which he has been able to collect, and the documents attached to his Report, that an impression prevails upon the spot to the effect that orders such as those described by Sir Lionel West were actually issued from Washington. There appears at all events to be some reason for believing that a telegram authorizing the release of the vessels then under detention was in fact received by the District Judge, and that instructions were thereupon issued by him for the purpose of carrying out these orders. The circumstances under which those instructions are said to have been subsequently rescinded by the District Judge have not unnaturally given rise to the gravest suspicion. 6. The Minister has called attention with great force in his Report to the injury sustained by persons engaged in the sealing industry from the suspense and uncertainty in which they have been kept during the past season owing to the refusal of the United States' Government to give any explicit assurances as to the treatment which they might'expect at its hands. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 70. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 21st September, 1887. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration the annexed Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries with reference to the seizure and detention of Canadian seating-vessels by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea. The Committee concur in the said Report, and they advise that your ExceUency he moved to transmit a copy of this Minute and the annexed papers to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All which is submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) ' JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 70. Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries III WITH reference to previous correspondence concerning the seizure and detention of Canadian sealing-vessels by the United States' authorities in tBehring's Sea, the Minister of Marine and Fisheries begs to submit, for the consideration of his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, the following 'papers :— 105 (a.) A letter from Collector Hamley, of Victoria, British Columbia, dated the 1st September, 1887, inclosing certain papers in reference to the seizure of the Canadian sealing-schooner " Alfred Adams " in Behring's Sea. (6.) The Declaration of William Henry Dyer, of Victoria, British Columbia, master of the Canadian schooner "Alfred Adams." (c.) A certificate of seizures of the "Alfred Adams," signed by L. G. Shepard, captain of the United 'States' Revenue steamer " Rush." (d.) A sealed and unopened letter directed to the United States' District Attorney and United States' Marshal, Sitka, Alaska. (e.) A letter from Collector Hamley, of Victoria, British Columbia, dated the 26th July, relating to the detention of the Canadian schooners " Onward," | Carolina," and " Thornton," seized in August 1886, by the United States' cutter " Corwin," in Behring's Sea. (/.) Copy of a telegram and order purporting to be from the United States' Attorney-General and Judge Dawson respectively, relating to the release of the above- named vessels; and (g.) A letter dated the 3rd September, 1887, from the law firm of Drake, Jackson, and Helmcken, of Victoria, containing additional information relating to the same. From the above-mentioned papers, it appears that on the 6th August, 1887, the Canadian schooner "Alfred Adams," whilst engaged in catching seals in the open sea, more than 50 miles distant from the nearest land, was forcibly seized by an armed vessel of the United States, her ship's papers taken, her cargo of seal-skins, 1,386 in number, together with all her arms, ammunition, and fishing implements transferred to the United States' cutter, and her captain ordered to proceed with sealed orders to Sitka, and to deliver himself, his vessel, and men into the hands of the United States' Marshal at that place. This treatment of the "Alfred Adams" whilst peaceably pursuing her lawful calling on the high seas is but a repetition of the unjustifiable seizures of Canadian vessels made by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea, and which have been dealt with at length in previous Reports to Council. The Minister, therefore, does not consider it necessary in this instance to traverse the ground already so fully covered, and recommends that a copy of this Report with the papers attached be forwarded to Her Majesty's Government for their earnest and immediate consideration, and that a copy thereof be sent to the British Minister at Washington, together with the sealed letter given by Captain Shepard to the master of the "Adams," with the request that it be forwarded to Mr. Secretary Bayard. With reference to the attached papers (e), (/), and (g), the Minister observes that from the first (e) it appears that inquiries made by the Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, in July last, resulted in his obtaining the information that J*idge Dawson had up to that date received no orders for the release of the Canadian sealing-vessels seized in 1886, that the vessels had not been sold, and remained still under seizure, and that Judge Dawson, when questioned as to the report that a telegram had been sent to him by the Attorney-General of the United States, ordering the release of the vessels, had replied that he had heard of this report before, but that nothing of the kind had reached either himself or the United States' Marshal at Sitka. The paper marked (/) purports to be a copy of a telegram, dated the 26th January, 1887, from the United States' Attorney-General Garland to Judge Dawson, ordering him to release the vessels seized in August preceding, and of an order founded thereon from Judge Dawson to the United States' Marshal at Sitka, bearing date the 19th February, 1887, directing him to " release the ' Carolina,' l Onward,' ' Thornton,' and ' San Diego/ together with all their tackle, apparel, skins, guns, ammunition, small boats, and everything pertaining to said vessels." The third paper, marked (g), is a copy of a letter from the law firm of Drake," Jackson, and Helmcken, of Victoria, British Columbia, to the Minister of Justice, informing him that they are advised that a telegram was received by Judge Dawson from the United States' Attorney-General, ordering the release of the vessels above referred to; that Judge Dawson did issue an order accordingly, but that he afterwards rescinded the order on the assumption that the telegram was a forgery, and that since I no official letters of any sort, either confirming the telegram or respecting the affair, has been received at Sitka." The Minister observes that, if the information conveyed in the above-mentioned [128] P m&z 106 |;l gf j mi Is '-. •'■'■ papers is correct, of which there appears no reasonable doubt, it reveals a state of affairs by no means satisfactory. On the 3rd February, 1887", Mr. Secretary Bayard informed the British Minister at Washington that " orders have been issued by the President's direction for the discontinuance of all pending proceedings, the discharge of the vessels referred to, and the release of all persons under arrest in connection therewith." A telegram in accordance with Mr. Bayard's communication appears to have been sent to Alaska, and an order based thereon to have been issued by the District Judge, but to have been afterwards rescinded, and no further action has been taken up to date of latest information. Meanwhile,, the vessels remain under seizure, the seal-skins are forfeited, and the property of Canadian citizens forcibly withheld from them under circumstances which involve very great loss and damage. The Minister further observes that, with a view of guiding the action of Canadian citizens interested in sealing in- the northern seas, repeated attempts were made previous to the commencement of the present season to obtain an official expression from the United States' Government of the policy they proposed to pursue in their treatment of foreign vessels sealing in Behring's Sea, but that these efforts proved altogether unavailing. From Mr; Bayard's communication of the 3rd February, 1887, above referred to, the fair inference, however, was to be drawn that, until the question in dispute between the two Governments as to the legality of the previous seizures had been finally disposed of, no further seizures would be made; and there is no doubt that on the strength of this communication, and in the absence of any exrplicit statement of policy to the contrary, Canadian citizens did, in the beginning of the present season, embark upon their customary sealing expeditions to Behring's Sea, under the reasonable impresson that they would not be interfered with by the United States' authorities so long as they conducted their operations in the open sea, only, however, to find their vessels seized, their property confiscated, and their ventures completely ruined. It is respectfully submitted that this condition of affairs is in the highest degree detrimental to the interests of Canada, and should not be permitted to continue. For nearly two vears Canadian vessels have- been exposed to arbitrary seizure and confisca- tion in the pursuit of a lawful occupation upon the high seas, and Canadian citizens subjected to imprisonment and serious financial loss; while an important and remunerative Canadian industry has been threatened with absolute ruin. This course of action has been pursued by the United States' officers in opposition to the contention in the past of their Government in regard to the waters in which these seizures have taken place, in violation of the plainest dictates of international law, and in the face of repeated and vigorous protests of' both the Canadian and British Governments. The Minister advises that Her Majesty's Government be again asked to give its serious and immediate attention to the repeated remonstrances of the Canadian Government against the unwarrantable action of the United States in respect to Canadian vessels in Behring's Sea, with a view to obtain a speedy recognition of its just rights, and full reparation for the losses sustained by its citizens. The whole respectfully submitted. (Signed) GEORGE E. FOSTER, Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Department of Fisheries, Ottawa, September 15, 1887.. • ■':■ Inclosure 4 in No. 70. Mr. Hamley to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Dear Sir, Custom-house, Victoria, British Columbia;- July 26, 1887. CAPTAIN CARROLL, master of the American steamer | Olympian," has been taking parties of excursionists to Sitka, and I asked him to see the Judge, Mr. Dawson, and find out something we could trust respecting the seized vessels. Dawson told him he had received no orders whatever for the release of the vessels; they have not been sold, and remain as they were, under seizure. Captain Carroll told Dawson of the telegram dated last January, purporting to have been sent by. Mr. Garland, Attorney-General at Washington, in the President's name, ordering the vessels to be released. Dawson said he had heard of it before, and that it must have is t07 been as he termed it, a "put up thing," as nothing of the kind had reached either himself or the United States' Marshal at Sitka. The serious part is that our people, trusting to the story of the order for release, have sent thirteen vessels again this year to the sealing grounds. One has been seized already, and if the others fall in the way of the Revenue cutters they wiR probably be seized also. I may perhaps learn something more from the Admiral when he returns from Alaska, and, if so, I will write to you again. Tours, &c. (Signed) W. HAMLET. Inclosure 5 in No. 70. The Attorney- General, Washington, to Judge Lafayette Dawson and M. D. Ball. (Telegraphic.) Washington, District of Columbia, January 26, 1887. I AM directed by the President to instruct you to discontinue any further proceedings in the matter of the seizure of the British vessels " Carolina," " Onward," and " Thornton," and discharge all vessels now held under such, seizure, ana release all persons that may be under arrest in connection therewith.. Inclosure 6 in No. 70. Mr. Dawson to Mr. Atkins. To Barton Atkins, United States' Marshal for the District of Alaska, YOU are hereby directed to release the vessels " Carolina," " Onward," "Thornton," and "San Diego," which were seized in Behring's Sea for violation of section 1956, United States' Statutes, together with their tackle, apparel, skins,* guns, ammunition, small boats, and everything pertaining to said vessels, this 19th day of February, 1887. (Signed) LAFAYETTE DAWSON, District Judge, District of Alaska, Inclosure 7 in No. 70. Mr. Hamley to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Sir, Custom-house, Victoria, September 1, 1887. ON the 7th August the master of tli£ United States' Revenue cutter " Rush" seized in Behring's Sea, 60 miles from any land, the Canadian schooner "Alfred Adams," her register, clearance, guns, and ammunition, and the seal-skins she had taken (1,386) were all taken from her, and the vessel herself ordered to Sitka. No one from the Revenue cutter was put on board by Captain Shepard, and the master of the "Alfred Adams," instead of going, as he was desired, to Sitka, returned to Victoria, arriving here the 31st August. I forward the master's depositions before a notary public, and what Captain Shepard is pleased to term a certificate of the schooner's seizure, signed by himself. Mr. Drake, a solicitor, is at Sitka, waiting for the cases to be heard in Court. The trial was delayed for the arrival of the "Rush," and she was expected about the beginning of this month. Mr. Drake will no doubt report direct to the Minister of Justice. I have, &c. (Signed) W. HAMLEY. P.S.—I inclose also a sealed letter addressed by Captain Shepard to the District Attorney and United States' Marshal at Sitka, which the master of the "Alfred Adams" brought down with him, and which you can deal with in any way you think fit. W. H. [123] * Please note skins,-—C. A. M. P 2 Mmmm 108 1 P 111 ||g|gj Inclosure 8 in No. 70. > Captain Shepard to the District Attorney and United States' Marshal at Sitka. United States' Revenue steamer " Rushf Behring's Sea, To whom it may concern, August 6, 1887. THIS will certify that I have this day seized the British schooner "Alfred Adams," of Victoria, British Columbia, Captain W. H. Dyer, master, for violation of law, and have taken charge of his ship's papers, viz., register, shipping articles, clearance, bill of health, and log book; also her arms and seal-skins. Very respectfullv, (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD, Captain, United States' Revenue Marine. Inclosure 9 in No. 70. Declaration. lilll In the Matter of the seizure of the Sealing-schooner "Alfred Adams " by the United States1 Revenue cutter " Richard Rush." I, WILLIAM HENRY DYER, of Victoria, British Columbia, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare that— 1. I am the master of the schooner "Alfred Adams," of the port of Victoria, British Columbia, engaged in the business of catching seals. On the 6th August, 1887, while on board the said schooner, and in command of the same, being in latitude 54° 48' north and longitude 167° 49' west the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush" steamed alongside, lowered a boat commanded by the First Lieutenant and boat's crew. The said Lieutenant came on board the said '' Alfred Adams " and ordered me to take the ship's register, log-book, articles, and all others of the ship's papers on board the " Richard Rush." In obedience to his command, I took all said papers and accompanied the said Lieutenant on board the " Richard Rush." When I arrived on board the " Rush," the Captain of the " Rush " asked me what was my business in the Behring's Sea; I replied taking seals. He inquired how many skins I had; I replied 1,386. He then said he would seize the ship, take the skins, arms, ammunition, and spears. I stated I did not think the ship was liable to seizure, as we had never taken a seal within 60 miles of Ounalaska, nor nearer St. Paul's than 60 miles south of it, and that we had never been notified that the waters were prohibited, unless landing and taking them from the Island of St. Paul's. He stated he must obey the orders of his Government, and that our Government and his must settle the matter, and ordered me to proceed on board the said schooner and deliver up my arms, ammunition, and skins and spears. He sent two boats belonging to the "Rush" in charge of the First and Second Lieutenant of the "Rush" respectively, and manned with sailors from the " Rush," who came on board the said schooner (I returning in company with the First Lieutenant). They took from the said schooner 1,386 skins, 4 kegs powder (3 triple F and 1 blasting powder), 500 shells, 3 cases caps and primers, 9 breach-loading double-barrelled shot-guns, 1 Winchester rifle, all in good order, and 12 Indian spears, and he then gave me a sealed letter addressed to the United States' Marshal and United States' District Attorney at Sitka; he also gave me an acknowledgment of the goods taken, and also gave me a certificate that the said schooner was under seizure, and, after being alongside for about 3^ hours, I received orders in writing to proceed to Sitka, and report to the United States' District Attorney and Marshal: we then parted company. My crew consisted of myself, mate, 2 seamen, 1 Chinese cook, and 21 Indians. Previous to the said seizure we had spoken the schooner " Kate," of Victoria, and had been informed by the mate of that vessel that the crews (and particularly the Indians) taken to Sitka on schooners previously seized had been very badly treated. The Indians became very mutinous on learning that we were to proceed to Sitka and report to the United States' authorities; they declared they would not go to Sitka and, to avoid trouble, I came to Victoria, instead of going to Sitka. I arrived in Victoria on the 31st August, 1887, at about 7 p.m. 109 And I make this solemn Declaration, conscientiously belieYing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Oaths Ordinance, 1869. (Signed) W. H. DYER. Declared before me this 1st day of September, A.D. 1887, at Victoria, British Columbia. (Signed) H. Dallas Helmcken. A Notary Public in and fon the Province- of British Columbia. $&rl (L.S-) Inclosure 10 in No. 70. Messrs. Drake, Jackson, and Helmcken to the Minister of Justiee, Ottawa.. Sir, Victoria, British Columbia, September 3, 1887. WE have the honour to inform you that we are in receipt of a letter from our Mr. Drake, written from Sitka,, under date the 28th August, in which he states that a telegram was. received at Sitka relative to the schooners seized last year from the United States' Attorney-General Garland, directing their release and discharge of the men. The- Jud^e gave an Order accordingly, which was afterwards rescinded, on the assumption that the telegram was a forgery. No official letter of' any sort, either confirming the telegram or respecting the affair, has been received at Sitka. The schooners now seized and at Sitka are the "Anna Beek," "W: P. Sayward," "Dolphin," and:" Grace." The "Alfred Adams" was also seized. The trial of the present men, Mr. Drake states, would not take place until after the arrival of the Revenue cutter "Rush;" also that, judging from the past and the views held by the Court, the result would most probably be the same, and urges that immediate steps should be taken to prevent the imprisonment of the masters, and that he would obtain declarations from the masters duly certified, and enter a protest at the. trial. The " Rush " was not expected at Sitka until yesterday. Regarding the seizure of the " Alfred Adams," we have to state that the schooner has arrived here safely. The declarations of her captain, Captain Dyer, and his men have been duly taken, which her owners, Messrs. Guttman and Frank, of this city, yesterday handed to Honourable Mr. Stanley, Collector of Customs, together with a sealed letter, which the commander of the " Rush " handed to Captain Dyer, to be delivered to the District Attorney at Sitka. These papers no doubt Mr. Stanley has already forwarded to the proper Department. We have since forwarded a copy of this information to the Right Honourable Sir John A. Macdonald, K.C.B., &c. We have, &c. (Signed) DRAKE, JACKSON, and HELMCKEN. Inclosure 11 in No. 70.. Mr. Burbidge to the Deputy Minister of Fisheries, Ottawa. Sir, Department of Justice, Ottawa, September 12, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose, for your information, a copy of a letter which has been received by the Minister of Justice from Messrs. Drake, Jackson, and Helmeken, in which they report with reference to the sealing vessels which have been seized in the Behring's Sea by the United States' authorities. I am to state that the Minister of Justice has taken no action with respect to this communication, but that he is of opinion that the Minister of Marine and Fisheries should, at his earliest convenience, take steps to communicate the substance thereof to the Colonial Office and to the British Minister at Washington. I have, &c. (Signed) GEO. W. BURBIDGE, Deputy Minister of Justice. ■HE 110 im . No. 71. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, October 19, 1887. INFORMATION has reached Her Majesty's Government from the Government of Canada that a further seizure has been made of a Canadian vessel, the " Alfred Adams," by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush," when engaged in seal-fishing in Behring's Sea in latitude 54° 48' north, and longitude 167° 49' west, more than 50 miles distant irom the nearest land. I have to request that you will forthwith address a protest to the <Govemment of the United States against this seizure, and against the continuance of similar proceedings on the high seas by the authorities of the United States. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 72. Foreign Office to CohniaM Office. Sir, Foreign Office, October 20,1887. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 17th instant inclosing copies of a correspondence received from the Governor- 'General of Canada relative to the seizures by the authorities of the United States of pertain British vessels when engaged in seal-fishing in Behring's Sea. With reference to the latest ease reported, that of the Canadian schooner " Alfred Adams," I am to request that you will inform Sir H. Holland that a telegram has been sent to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington directing him to make a protest to the United States Government against the seizure of that vessel, and the continuance on the liigh seas of similar proceedings by the authorities of the United States. With regard to the report that it had been stated by Mr. Bayard that no protest bad been made against the right of those authorities to make the seizures, and that it had been therefore assumed that Her Majesty's Government did not really dispute the right, I am to remind you,that Sir L. West, acting on the instructions which were given to him bv the late Earl of Iddesleigh on the 20th October, 1886, addressed a note to the United States' Secretary of State protesting, in the name of Her Majesty's Government, against the seizure of the three Columbian schooners " Thornton," " Onward," and "Carolina" by the United States' Revenue-cruizer "Corwin." 1 am further to point out that the directions given to Sir L. West in regard to subsequent seizures of other British vessels in Behring's Sea during the present fishing season, which were embodied in Lord Salisbury's despatches of the 10th and 27th ultimo, amount to a protest against the assumption by the United States' Government of their right to seize British vessels on the high seas in those waters. 1 am to request that in laying this letter before Sir H. Holland you will move him to ascertain by telegraph whether the Report of Mr. Foster (the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries) of the 15th ultimo has been communicated by Lord Lansdowne, with the papers attached, to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, as suggested in the Report. On learning that this has been done Lord Salisbury proposes to authorize Sir L. West to give a copy of them to Mr. Bayard. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 73. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 24.) My Lord, Washington, October 12, 1887. IN accordance with the instructions contained in your Lordship's telegram -of the 27th ultimo, I addressed a note to the Secretary of State, copy of which I had the honour to inclose to your Lordship in my despatch of the 28th ultimo, inquiring ■the reason why the vessels referred to in his note of the 3rd February last had not been released, and I now inclose copy of the reply which I have received thereto, I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Ill Inclosure in No. 73. Mr.. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, October II, 1887". I HAVE the honour to acknowledge your note of the 28th ultimo, stating that Her Majesty's Government had been officially informed' that ttie. British vessels- referred to in my note to you of the 3rd February last had not been released, and asking the reason for the delay in complying with the orders of the Executive in that regard; Upon receiving your note I at once wrote my colleague the Attorney-General, as the Head of the Department of Justice, in order that I might be enabled to reply satisfactorily to your inquiry. I am stiH without an answer from him, which, when, received, shall be promptly communicated to you.. In the meantime, in acknowledging your note, I take occasion to state my impression—that if the three vessels seized, and ordered to be released, have not been- repossessed by their owners, it is not because of any hindrance on the part of any official of this Government, or failure to obey the order for release, but probably because of the remoteness of the locality (Sitka) where they were taken after arrest for adjudication, and the proceedings having been in remj the- owners have not seen proper to proceed, to Alaska, and repossess- themselves of the property in question. I have, &c. (Signed) T, F. BAYARD. No. 74. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 24.) My Lord,. Washington, October 12, 1887. WITH reference to* your Lordship's despatch of the 15th ultimo, respecting the judicial proceedings in the cases of the schooners "Carolina," "Onward,"' and' "Thornton," I have the honour to state that, from what I can ascertain, the notice of appeal in these cases in still lying in the Sitka Court, for there is no Court to which under the Act of Congress the injured parties could appeal, and as in the case of the American vessel " San> Diego," no further steps can be taken in the matter. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WT3ST. No. 75,. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 24.) My Lord, Washington, October 12, 1887*. IN accordance with the instructions contained in your Lordship's despatch- of the 27th ultimo, I addressed a note to the Secretary of State, copy of which I have the honour to inclose herewith,, making similar representations respecting the seizure of the Rritish vessels "Grace," "Dolphin,'" and "W. P. Sayward," as. were made in the cases of the " Onward," " Carolina," and " Thornton," and reserving all rights to compensation- on behalf of the owners and crew. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S.. SACKVILLE. WEST.. Inclosure im Noi 75.. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard.. Sir, Washington, October 12, 1887. IN connection with the representation which I was instructed to make to you respecting the seizure of the British schooners "Onward," "Carolina," and "Thornton," by the United States' cruizer " Corwin," in Behring's Sea> I.have the honour to inform. 112 you that I am now further instructed to make similar representations in the cases of the British Columbian vessels "Grace," "Dolphin," and "W. P. Sayward," seized lately by the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush," and at the same time, as in the case of the "Onward," " Carolina," and "Thornton," to reserve all rights to compensation on behalf of the owners and crews. I am also instructed to point out to you that, according to the deposition of the mate of the " W. P. Sayward," copy of which is inclosed, no seals had been taken by her crew in Behring's Sea as is alleged in the libels of information filed on behalf of the United States' District Attorney in the District Court of Alaska. I am, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. • No. 76. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 24.) My Lord, Washington. October 14, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of the reply which I have received to my note of the 12th instant, copy of which was inclosed in my despatch of the 12th instant, respecting the seizure of the "Grace," "Dolphin," and " W. P. Sayward." I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 76. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, October 13, 1887. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge your note of yesterdav in relation to the cases of the seizure of the British schooners "Onward," "Carolina," and " Thornton," in Behring's Sea, by United States' Revenue vessels in August 1886, and also your instructions to include by similar representations the cases of the British Columbian vessels "Grace," "Dolphin," and "W. P. Sayward," seized by the United States' Revenue authorities in Rehring's Sea, with notification that Her Britannic Majesty's Government reserve aU right to compensation on behalf of the owners and crews of the above-mentioned vessels. The affidavit of the mate of the " W. P. Sayward " has been read, and the facts therein stated will be at once investigated. I have, &c. (Signed) THOMAS F. BAYARD. No. 77. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 24.) My Lord, Washington, October 14, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copies of the brief recently filed in the Court at Sitka by the counsel for the United States-' Government which has appeared in the " New York Herald," as well as an article thereupon from that Journal. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No. 77. .Extract from the " New York Herald," October 18, 1887. Ottawa, Ontario, October 12, 1887. THE Government here are in receipt of advices from Sitka which contain the brief which is understood to have been prepared at Washington and recently filed in 113 the Court at Sitka by Mr. A. K. Delaney, as counsel for the United States' Govern- ment. The following is a verbatim copy of the brief:— " Case. " The information in this case is based on Section 1956 of Chapter 3 of the Revised Statutes of the United States, which provides that' No person shall kill any otter, mink, martin, sable or fur seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska Territory or in the waters thereof.' " The offence is charged to have been committed 130 miles north of the Island of Ounalaska, and therefore in the main waters of that part of the Behring's Sea ceded by Russia to the United States by the Treaty of 1867. The defendants demur to the information on the ground— " 1. That the Court has no jurisdiction over the defendants, the alleged offence having been committed beyond the limit of a marine league from the shores of Alaska. " 2. That the Act under which the defendants were arrested is unconstitutional in so far as it restricts the free navigation of the Behring's Sea for fishing and sealing purposes beyond the limits of a marine league from shore. The issue thus raised by the demurrer presents squarely the questions :— " (1.) The jurisdiction of the United States over Behring's Sea. " (2.) The power of Congress to legislate concerning those waters. " The Argument. " The fate of the second of these propositions depends largely upon that of the first, for if the jurisdiction and dominion of the United States as to these waters be •not sustained the restrictive Acts of Congress must fall, and if our jurisdiction shall be sustained small question can be made as to the power of Congress to regulate fishing and sealing within our own waters. The grave question, one important to all the nations of the civilized world, as well as to the United States and Great Britain, is ' the dominion of Behring's Sea.' " The Three Mile Limit. ' | Concerning the doctrine of international law establishing what is known as the marine league belt, which extends the jurisdiction of a nation into adjacent seas for the distance of 1 marine league, or 3 miles from its shores, and following aU 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 reaffirmed by his successors—Mr. Pickering, in 1796; 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. (Wheaton's ' International Law,' vol. i, sec. 32, pp. 100 and 109.) " Sanctioned thus by an unbroken line of precedents covering the first century of our national existence, the United States would not abandon this doctrine if they could ; they could not if they would. " Landlocked Seas. " Well grounded as is this doctrine of the law of nations, it is no more firmly established as a part of the international code than that other principle which gives to a nation supremacy, jurisdiction, dominion over its own inland waters, gulfs, bays, and seas. If a sea is entirely inclosed by the territories of a nation, and has no other •communication with the ocean than by a channel, of which that nation may take •possession, it appears that such a sea is no less capable of being occupied and becoming property than the land, and it ought to foUow the fate of the country that surrounds it. The Mediterranean in former times was absolutely inclosed within the territories of the Romans, and that people, by rendering themselves masters of the strait which joins it to the ocean might subject the Mediterranean to their Empire, and assume the dominion over it. They did not by such proceeding injure the rights of other nations, a particular sea being manifestly designed by nature for the use of the [128] Q kL I III. 114 lift* 11 lid league limit countries and nations that surround it. (Vattel's 'Law of Nations,' pp. 129 and 130.) I Chancellor Kent, in 1826, before the doctrine as to the marine was as firmly established as it now is, says :— " ' It is difficult to draw any precise or determined conclusion amid the variety of opinions as to the distance a State may lawfully extend its exclusive dominion over the seas adjoining its territories and beyond those portions of the sea which are embraced by harbours, gulfs, bays, and estuaries, and over which its jurisdiction unquestionably extends.' (Kent, vol. i, p. 28.) "Jurisdiction of States. " It thus appears that, while in 1826 the limit of the marine belt was unsettled, the jurisdiction of a State over its inland waters was unquestioned. "' In the laws of nations bays are regarded as a part of the territory of the country when their dimensions and configurations are such as to show shat the nation occupying the coast also occupies the bay as a part of its territory.' (Manning's ' Law of Nations,' p. 120.) " 'An inland sea or lake belongs to the State in which it is territorially situated. As illustrations, may be mentioned the inland lakes whose entire body is within the United States, and the Sea of Azof.' (Wheaton's ' International Law,' vol. i, sec. 31.) "' Rivers and inland lakes and seas, when contained in a particular State, are subject to the Sovereign of such State.' (Idem, vol. iii, sec. 300.) " ? Undoubtedly it is upon this principle of international law that our right to dominion over such vast inland waters as the great lakes, Boston Harbour, Long Island Sound, Delaware and Chesapeake Bays, Albemarle Sound, and the Bay of San Francisco rests. This country, in 1793, considered the whole of Delaware Bay to be within our territorial jurisdiction, and it rested its claim upon these authorities, which admit that gulfs, channels, and arms of the sea belong to the people within whose land they are encompassed.' (Kent's Com., vol. i, p. 528.) " The Doctrine always asserted. " It thus appears that our Government asserted this doctrine in its infancy. It was announced by Mr. Jefferson as Secretary of State and by the Attorney-General in 1793. Mr. Pickering, Secretary of State in 1796, reaffirms 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 landlocked as to be unquestionably within the jurisdiction of the States, be their extent what they may.' (Wheaton's ' International Law,' vol. i, sec. 32, pp. 2-100.) I Mr. Buchanan, Secretary of State, to Mr. Jordan, in 1849, reiterates this rule in the following language: ' The exclusive jurisdiction of a nation extends to the ports, harbours, bays, mouths of rivers, and adjacent parts of the sea inclosed by headlands.' (Idem, p. 101.) " Mr. Seward, in the Senate in 1852, substantially enunciates the same doctrine by declaring that, if we relied alone upon the old rule that only those bays whose entrance from headland to headland do not exceed 6 miles are within the territorial jurisdiction of the adjoining nation, our dominion to all the larger 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 international law which gives a nation jurisdiction over waters embraced within its land dominion. " Behring's Sea Inland Water. "It thus appears that from our earliest history, contemporaneously with our acceptance of the principle of the marine league belt and supported by the same high authorities is the assertion of the doctrine of our right to dominion over our inland waters under the Treaty of 1867, and on this rule of international law we base our claim to jurisdiction and dominion over the waters of the Behring's Sea. While it is, no doubt, true that a nation cannot by Treaty acquire dominion in contravention of the law of nations, it is none the less true that, whatever title or dominion our grantor, Russia, possessed under the law of nations at the time of the Treaty of Cession in 1867, 115 passed and now rightfully belongs to the United States. Having determined the law, we are next led to inquire as to whether Behring's Sea is an inland water or a part of the open ocean, and what was Russia's jurisdiction over it. " Behring's Sea is an inland water. Beginning on the eastern coast of Asia, this body of water, formerly known as the Sea of Kamchatka, is bounded by the Peninsula of Kamchatka and Eastern Siberia to the Behring's Strait.. From the American side of this strait the waters of the Behring's Sea wash the coast of the mainland of Alaska as far south as the Peninsula of Alaska. From the extremity of this peninsula, in a long, sweeping curve, the Aleutian Islands stretch in a continuous chain almost to the shores of Kamchatka, thus encasing the sea. " Russia's Title and Dominion. " It will not be denied that at the time the United States acquired the Territory of Alaska by the Treaty of 1867, the waters of the Behring's Sea washed only the shores of Russian territory. The territory on the Asiatic side she had possessed ' since the memory of man runneth not to the contrary.' • Her title to the other portions of those shores and her dominion over the waters of the Behring's Sea are based on ' discovery and settlement.' " Possession and Supremacy. " The right of a nation to acquire new territory by discovery and possession has been so universally recognized by the law of nations that a citation of authorities is scarcely necessary. Upon this subject the most eminent as well as the most conservative of authorities says : ' All mankind have an equal right to things that have not yet fallen into the possession of any one, and those things belong to the person who first takes possession of them. When, therefore, a nation finds a country uninhabited and without an owner, it may lawfully take possession of it, and after it has sufficiently made known its will in this respect it cannot be deprived of it by another nation.' " ' Thus navigators going on voyages of discovery, furnished with a commission from their Sovereign, meeting islands or other lands in a desert state, have taken possession of them in the name of their nation, and this title has been usually respected, provided it was soon followed by a real possession.' \ When a nation takes possession of a country to which no prior owner can lay claim, it is considered as acquiring the empire or sovereignty of it at the same time with the domain.' ] The whole space over which a nation extends its government becomes the seat of its jurisdiction and is called its territory.' (Vattel, p. 98.) " Such being the law, we are led to inquire as to on what discoveries, possessions, and occupation Russia's right to dominion in North America is based. ■ Historical Sketch—1725-1867. " In 1725, under the commission of that wondrous combination of iron and energy, Peter the Great, an expedition was organized, crossed the continent from St. Petersburgh to Kamchatka, where a. vessel was constructed, and in July 1728 sailed for explorations to the north and east. That vessel was the ' Gabriel.' Her master was Vitus Behring, a name destined to historical immortality. On the expedition Behring crossed the waters of the Sea of Kamchatka, discovered and named the Island St. Lawrence midway between which and the Asiatic mainland our boundary-line is laid down by the Treaty, and after passing through the straits which bear his name returned to St. Petersburgh. " In 1733 a second expedition was organized under the auspices of the Government and the commission of Queen Anne, and with Behring, raised to the rank of Admiral, at its head, repeated the long and dreary journey across Siberia, and in June 1741 sailed for new discoveries. In July of that year Behring sighted the American continent, some authorities claim at the 58th degree of north latitude, others at the 50th degree. The latter is probably correct, as it rests on the authority of Stellar, who accompanied the expedition, and Behring undoubtedly sailed as far south along the American coast as the 45th paraUel, in accordance with his instructions. But what is more pertinent to this inquiry, he discovered several of the Aleutian Islands and the Komanderoff group or couplet. On the larger of this couplet, which bears his name, the hardy navigator; after shipwreck, died on the 19th December, 1741. [123J Q 2 \Mlilfraiiii1imriBIi1iMffltiiiTf 116 Si: "Russian Discovery. " But the spirit of Russian discovery survived him, and from the starting point he began traders, hunters, and adventurers made their way from island to island until the whole Aleutian chain, and with it the mainland, was discovered. In 1743,1745, 1747, and 1749 a Cossack sergeant named Bossof made four consecutive voyages from the mainland of Kamchatka to the Behring and Copper Islands in vessels of his own construction. In 1745 a sailor named Nevidchinof, who had served under Behring, crossed the channel which connects the North Pacific Ocean with the Behring's Sea and discovered the Islands of Attoo and Agatoo, the former of which now marks the western limit of our land dominion. In 1744 a small Russian merchant-vessel reached the Island of Atka and some of the smaller islands surrounding it. " Ten years later Glottoff, in a ship belonging to an Okotsk merchant, advanced as far as the Island of Ounak, and subsequently discovered Ounalaska and the whole of that group of the Aleutian chain known as the Fox Islands. He made a Map of his explorations, which includes eight islands east of Ounalaska. In 1760 a Russian merchant, Adreian Tolstyk, landed on the Island of Adak, explored it and some of the surrounding islands, and made'a'report of his discoveries to the Russian Crown. This group was named after him, the Adreian Islands. The next year a ship belonging to a Russian merchant named Bechevin made the coast of the Alirska Peninsula, and in the autumn of 1762 Glottoff, who discovered Ounalaska and the Fox Group, reached the Island of Kodiak. In 1768 two captains of the Imperial Navy, Krenitzen and Levashoff, sailed from Kamchatha in two Government vessels, and the former passed the succeeding winter at Kodiak, and the latter at Ounalaska. " " Twenty-five years succeeding the death of Behring the spirit of discovery had planted the Russian ensign along the entire Aleutian chain, from Behring's Island to the mainland of the North American continent. " After the Seals. " Possession and occupation followed the footsteps of discovery, and settlements and trading posts were established at the more favourable points along the line. Expeditions, stimulated by the large remunerations of the fur traffic, were constantly fitted out at the ports along the shores of the Sea of Okotsk and the mouth of the Amoor River for voyages of trade and exploration in the new country. Lieutenant Elliot, in his Report on the seal islands, published with the Tenth Census of the United States, estimates that no fewer than twenty-five different Companies, with quite a fleet of small vessels, were thus employed as early as 1772. Under the auspices of one of these Companies, Shekeloff, a-merchant of Rylsk, founded the first permanent Settlement on the Island of Kodiak in 1784. From this point exploring expeditions were sent out, one of which crossed- the strait between Kodiak and the mainland which bears Shekeloff's name, and explored the coast of the mainland as far as Cook's Inlet, upon the shores of which in 1786 a Settlement was established. " Another pushed along the coast to Prince William Sound and Cape St. Elias, the latter of which was located by Behring in 1741. In 1788 another of Shekeloff's ships visited Prince William Sound, discovered Yakutat Bay, and made a thorough exploration of Cook's Inlet. In the meantime, in 1786, Gehrman Pribylov, a Muscovite ship's mate, sailed from Ounalaska in a small sloop called the " St. George," discovered the islands which bear his name, located in the heart of the Behring's Sea, and now far famed as the only seal rookeries in the known world. " Baranoff's Mission | In 1790 the Shekeloff Company placed at the head of all enterprises in the new country that restless spirit whose energies clinched Russia's dominion to her possessions in North America, Alexander Baranoff. Arriving at Kodiak, he changed the head-quarters of the Company to the harbour of St. Paul, where the village of that name now stands, and the next year one of his skippers passed round the extremity of the Alaska Peninsula and along the north-western coast to Bristol Bay, discovering Kvichak River and the Lake Llamna, and crossed the portage to the mouth of Cook's Inlet, thus finding the safest and quickest means of communication between Shekeloff Strait and the Behring's Sea. " In 1794 Baranoff established a ship-yard at Resurrection Bay, on Prince William Sound. About this time the first missionaries of the Greek Church arrived, and 117 Missions were established at Kodiak, Ounalaska, and Spruce Island. The next year Baranoff extended his operations and trading posts to Yakutat Bay. Following this was the consolidation of all Russian interests in North America, giving rise to the Russian-American Company, which was chartered the year that Baranoff founded Sitka, 1799. The possessions and supremacy Russia gained under this Corporation have been so universally acknowledged and widely understood as to scarcely need comment. Under this Company, chartered by the Crown, patronized by nobility, sustained by the sinews of consolidated capital, and led by the tireless energy of Baranoff, new explorations and Settlements inevitably f oUowed. " As early as 1806, aside from trading posts and Settlements along the Aleutian Islands, we find the Russian-American Company had established fourteen fortified stations from Kodiak to the Alexander Archipelago, now known as South-eastern Alaska—one at Three Saints Harbour, one at St. Paul Island, one on the Island of Kodiak, one off Afognak Island, one at the entrance of Cook's Inlet, three on the coast of the inlet, two on Prince William Sound, one at Cape St. Elias, two on Yakutat Bay, and one at New Archangel, on the Bay of Sitka. " Along the Coast. in charge of the affairs ol " After the death of Baranoff, in 1819, his successor the Company, Lieutenant Yanovsky, made extensive explorations of the coast and mainland above the Alaska Peninsula. One expedition explored and made a preliminary survey of the coast from Bristol Bay as far as the mouth of the Kuskovim River, discovering and locating that stream and also the Island of Nunivak, on parallel 60th degree, in Behring's Sea. Another passed beyond the mouth of the Yukon to Norton's Sound, and another entered the Nushegak Biver just above Bristol Bay, pushed into the interior, and crossed the mountains and tundras into the valley of the Kuskovim. FoUowing these, in 1824 and 1826, were the explorations and surveys of Ethloin and Luedke, further north on the coast of the mainland. " In 1824 that eminent divine of the Greek Church, Bishop Veniamanoff, visited the coast between Bristol Bay and the Kuskovim, establishing Missions, chapels, and churches. Previous to this time, in 1815, Lieutenant Kotzebue, under the patronage of Count Rumiantzo, had discovered and surveyed Kotzebue Sound and the Arctic coast of America as far as Cape Lisburne. Lieutenant Tebenkof, of the navy, in 1835 established Missions and redoubts at St. Michael's, on the Norton Sound, and in 1838 an expedition fitted out by him located Point Barrow. Meanwhile, expeditions had penetrated into the interior. Glazunof ascended the Yukon as far as Nulato, and made the first portage between that river and the Kuskovim in 1836, while Malakof reached the same point from the redoubt established by Veniamanoff on the Nushegak, by way of that river and the Kuskovim. "They were followed by Lieutenant Zagoskin, of the Imperial Navy, who in 1842-43 with five assistants made extensive explorations of basins of the Yukon and Kuskovim, a voluminous journal of which is now in print. " Unbroken Possession. "This brings us to the close of the first century of Russian discoveries and occupation in Ncrth America. It is needless to foUow further, as the twenty-five years intervening between 1842 and the date of the Treaty of the United States are but a continuation and repetition of Russian occupation and supremacy of this territory. That possession was never changed or broken until it passed to the United States under the Treaty of 1867. The archives of Russia will further show that the Imperial Government itself not only fostered these discoveries, but from the earliest period has asserted and exercised dominion over the North American possessions. " The discoveries of Behring in 1728-41 were under Royal Commission. In 1766 Tolstyk, after his discovery of the Adreian group of the Aleutian chain, was granted •special privileges in the new possessions by an Edict of Catherine II. The expedition of Kreutzen, of the Imperial Navy, to Ounimak Island in 1758 was under commission of the same Sovereign. Upon the Report of the Committee of Commerce and the recommendation of the Governor-General of Siberia in 1768, Shelikof was granted a credit from the Public Treasury of 200,000 roubles to carry forward his enterprises in North America. By a Ukase of Catherine II in 1793 Missions of the Greek Church were established in the new dominion, and a Colony was also founded at Kodiak under Royal Edict. 118 " The Russian-American Company. "The Charter of the Russian-American Company issued in 1799 declares Russia's dominion in the following language: ' By the right of discovery in past times by Russian navigators of the north-western part of America, beginning from the 55th degree of north latitude and the chain of island sextending from Kamchatka to America and [southward to Japan, graciously permit the Company to have the use of all hunting grounds and establishments now existing on the north-western coast of America, from the above-mentioned 55th degree to Behring's Strait, and on the same on the Aleutian Kurile Islands situated on the north-eastern ocean.' " In conclusion, the Charter enjoins: ' All military and civil authorities in the above-mentioned localities not only not to prevent the Company from enjoying to the fullest extent the privileges granted, but in case of need to protect them with all their power from loss or injury, and render them, upon application of the Company, all aid, assistance, and protection.' " This assertion of dominion by Russia was reiterated in 1820, when, by an Imperial Ukase, Alexander I granted the second Charter to the Russian-American Company, renewing its privileges for twenty years, and was again asserted in 1844 by the granting of the third Charter, which not only increased the privileges of the Company, but also provided a system of colonial government for the Russian- American colonies for the twenty succeeding years. " Russian Ordinance of 1821. " All these assertions of jurisdiction and dominion passed unchallenged, but in 1821 the Imperial Government had issued an Ordinance regulating traffic in its Asiatic and American possessions, and reserved exclusively to subjects of the Russian Empire ' the transaction of commerce, the pursuit of whaling and fishing, or any other industry, on the islands in the harbours and inlets, and in general along the north-western coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st parallel of north latitude and in the Aleutian Islands, and along the coast of Siberia and on the Kurile Islands., from Behring's Strait to the south-eastern promontory of the Island of Urup—viz., as far south as latitude 45° and 50° north.' I This Ordinance called forth the protests of the United States and Great Britain, and protracted discussions followed. A critical examination of the diplomatic correspondence between the United States and Great Britain on one side and Russia upon the other will disclose that the points in dispute in the controversy were the assertion of Russia to exclusive jurisdiction over the Pacific Ocean, the assertion of dominion over the coast of North America from the 55th parallel south to the 51st (See note of Mr. Adams, American Minister to Russia, to the Russian Minister, March 1822.) " Following these discussions came the Treaty of 1824 between Russia and the United States, and the analogous Treaty of 1825 between Russia and Great Britain. By these Treaties, Russia receded from her assertion of exclusive jurisdiction over the Pacific Ocean, and abandoned her claim to possessions on the coast of North America, south of 54° 40'. The I The Treaty. following are the Articles of the Treaty between the Fnited States and Russia germane to the questions involved in the case :- '"ARTICLE I. " ' It is agreed that in any part of the great ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean, or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts upon points which may not already have been occupied for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following Articles. "'ARTICLE II. " 'With a view of preventing the rights of navigation and of fishing exercised upon the great ocean by the citizens and subjects of the High Contracting Powers from becoming the pretext of an illicit trade, it is agreed that the citizens of the 119 United States shaU not resort to any point where there is a Russian establishment without the permission of the Governor or Commander, and that reciprocally the subjects of Russia shall not resort without permission to any establishment of the United States upon the north-west coast. "'ARTICLE III. " ' It is, moreover, agreed that hereafter there shall not be formed by the citizens of the United States, or under 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 54° 40' north latitude, and that in the same manner there shall be none formed by the Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south of the same parallel. I' ARTICLE IV. " ' It is, nevertheless, understood that during a term of ten years, counting from the signatures 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.' (Wheaton's ' International Law,' vol. i, pp. 2-112.) " The Treaty between Russia and Great Britain contains substantially the same provisions. Neither in the Treaties nor in the correspondence is any reference made to Russia's claim of dominion over the Behring's Sea. If in the diplomatic correspondence leading up to the Treaty any challenge as to the jurisdiction of Behring's Sea had been made, why was it not settled by the Treaties ? Did the High Contracting Powers to these Treaties enter into a discussion lasting nearly two years as to one Of v matter and make adjustment by Treaty as to other matters ? " The Convention between Russia and Great Britain, aside from disposing of the question of Russia's asserted sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean and fixing the southern limit of her possession on the western coast of North America, also established the dividing line of their respective North American possessions from 54 40 north to the frozen ocean, which boundary-line is incorporated verbatim into the Treaty of Cession of 1867 from Russia to the United States. (Treaty of 1867, Article I.) " If differences existed as to the dominion of the Behring's Sea, why were they not also settled, as that manifestly would be a part of the object of holding the Convention ? " Russia's Jurisdiction. " It cannot be successfully maintained that by such terms as the ' Great Ocean,' the ' Pacific Ocean,' or the ' South Sea,' the High Contracting Powers referred to the Behring's Sea. Aside from this, it is stipulated in both Treaties that the ships, citizens, and subjects of either Power may reciprocally frequent the interior seas, gulfs, harbours, and creeks of the other on the North American coast for a period of ten years. The_imkj£j^grior sea on the North American coast was the Behring's Sea held by Russia. If that was a part of the ' Pacific Ocean,' or-the ' Great Ocean,' or the ' South Sea,' or belonged to the high seas under the law of nations, why the term ' interior sea,' and why should the United States and Great Britain accept a ten years' limit of the right of navigation, fishing, and trading in an interior sea if they had the unconditional right to frequent those waters under the law of nations ? " This section of the Treaty, therefore, really concedes Russia's dominion over Behring's Sea. Chancellor Kent alludes to this subject as the ' claim of Russia to sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean north of the 51st degree of latitude.' (Kent, vol. i, p. 28.) "A summary of results following the discussions and Conventions as to the Royal Ordinance of 1821 is the abandonment by Russia of her claim to sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean; a surrender of her claim to the North American coast south of 54° 40'; a settlement by Russia and Great Britain as to the boundary-line of their possessions in North America; agreements as to settlements upon each other's territory and navigation of each other's waters, but no surrender of Russia's jurisdiction over the Behring's Sea. sin 120 " Powers of Congress. " Upon this branch of the subject, the power of Congress over Behring's Sea^ there seems to be little room for discussion. The power of a nation to control its own dominions is one of the inherent elements of sovereignty. "' When a nation takes possession of certain parts of the sea, it takes possession of the empire over them as well as of the domain, on the same principles which are advanced in treating of the land. These parts of the sea are within the jurisdiction of the nation and a part of its territory; the Sovereign commands them; he makes laws and may punish those who violate them; in a word, he has the same rights there as on the land, and in general, every right which the laws of the State allow him.' (VatteFs ' Law of Nations,' p. 130.) " By the Treaty of 1867, ' the cession of territory and dominion therein made is declared to be free and unencumbered by any reservations, privileges, franchises, grants, or possessions, and conveys aU the rights, franchises, and privileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory or dominion and the appurtenances thereto.' (Treaty, Article VI.) | The Constitution of the United States declares that all Treaties made under the authority of the United States shall be the supreme law of the land. (Constitution of the United States, Article 6.) I That same instrument vests in Congress ' the power to make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States.' (Constitution of the United States, Article 4, section 3.) " Manifestly, the Acts of Congress contained in chapter 3, Revised Statutes of the United States, 'relating to the unorganized Territory of Alaska,' and under which the information is brought, are embraced within these constitutional provisions. " Conclusion. " The foregoing record may contain but a meagre idea of the indomitable energy and perseverance displayed by the Russian people in acquiring empire in North America, beginning with discoveries of Behring in 1728, and extending for more than a century and a quarter, wherein they braved the perils of land and sea, overcame a savage native population, faced ice and snow, storm and shipwreck, to found and maintain empire on these rugged shores. Enough has been said to disclose the basis of Russia's right to jurisdiction of the Behring's Sea under the law of nations, viz., original possession of the Asiatic coast, followed by discovery and possession of the Aleutian chain and the shores of Alaska North, not only to Behring's Strait but to Point Barrow and the frozen ocean, thus inclosing within its territory, as within the embrace of a mighty giant, the islands and waters of Behring's Sea, and with this the assertion and exercise of dominion over land and sea. " Such is our understanding of the law, such is the record. Upon them the United 'States are prepared to abide the Judgments of the Courts and the opinion of the civilized world. Inclosure 2 in No. 77. Extract from the "New York Herald," October 13, 1887. |fl i., ;i - The Alaskan Seal Fisheries.—The "Herald" lays before its readers this morning the grounds on which the United States claims exclusive jurisdiction over the seal fisheries of Behring's Sea, as set forth in the brief of the counsel for this country in the case against certain British vessels charged with violating our rights. The plea in defence is that the United States has no dominion over the waters of Behring's Sea beyond a marine league, or 3 miles, from the Alaskan shore. But this view cannot be sustained. As is shown by numerous authorities cited in Counsellor Delaney's brief, it is a recognized principle of international law, and one which this country has always asserted, that a nation has jurisdiction not only over waters within the marine league, but all waters, whatever their extent, embraced within its land dominion. Gulfs, bays, and arms of the sea belong to the country within whose land they are encompassed. Now Behring's Sea is not a part of the open or high sea. It is, as Mr. Delaney clearly shows, " an inland water cut off from the ocean and essentially land-locked." Before the purchase of Alaska by the United States in 1867 it was within the exclusive 121 jurisdiction of Russia. By that purchase it passed into the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, which succeeded to the title of Russia. No. 78. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, October 26, 1887. WITH reference to my despatch of the 19th instant, requesting you to protest to the United States' Government against the seizure of the British sealing schooner " Alfred Adams " in Behring's Sea, I have to instruct you to give the United States' Secretary of State a copy of the Report, and inclosures, which was drawn up by Mr. Foster, the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, on the 15th ultimo. I understand that this document has been communicated to you by the Governor- General of Canada, and a copy was inclosed in the letter from the Colonial Office of the 17th instant. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY.. No. 79. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, October 29, 1887. I HAVE received your despatch of the 14th instant, inclosing a note from Mr. Bayard, in which he expresses regret that the orders of the President of the United States for the release of the vessels " Carolina," | Onward," and | Thornton " should have been delayed through misconception, and states that renewed orders have been forwarded for their liberation. I approve your action in having forwarded a copy of this note to the Governor General of Canada. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. . No. 80. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 31.) My Lord, Washington, October 20, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which, upon the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 19th, I addressed to the Secretary of State protesting against the seizure of the Canadian vessel " Alfred Adams" in Behring's Sea, and against the continuation of similar proceedings by the United States' authorities on the high seas. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 80. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, October 19, 1887. I HAVE the honour to inform you that I am instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury, Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, to protest against the seizure of the Canadian vessel " Alfred Adams" in Behring's Sea, and against the continuation of similar proceedings by the United States' authorities on the high seas. L128] I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. R B9 122 No. 81. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received November 14.) My Lord, Washington, October 23, 1887. WITH reference to my despatch of the 20th instant, in which I had the honour to inclose copy of the note which, according to instructions, I addressed to the United States' Government on the subject of the seizure of the "Alfred Adams" in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to transmit herewith copy of Mr. Bayard's reply, in which he acknowledges the receipt of my above-mentioned communication. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 81. ■:.hS ' Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, October 22, 1887. I HAD the honour to receive last evening your note of the 19th instant, conveying the instructions addressed to you by the Marquis of Salisbury, that you should protest against the seizure of the Canadian vessel "Alfred Adams" in Behring's Sea, and against the continuance of similar proceedings by the United States' authorities on the high seas, and I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. WW No. 82. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received November 21.) Sir, Downing Street, November 19, 1887. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Secretary Sir Henry Holland to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding a Minute of the Executive Council of British Columbia respecting the value to that province of the sealing industry on Behring's Sea. I am to ask what answer should be returned to Lord Lansdowne, and to suggest that copies of these papers should be forwarded to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. (Signed) I am, &c. JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 82. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, October 20, 1887. I HAVE the honour to transmit to you a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, to which is appended a copy of a despatch from his Honour the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, covering a Minute of his Executive Council setting forth the value to British Columbia of the present sealing industry in Behring's Sea. You will observe that the Executive Council of British Columbia consider that the rights of British subjects, as regards the Behring's Sea, should be included in the scope of the duties of the International Fisheries Commission. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 82. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the \5th October, 1887. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had,under consideration a despatch, dated 15th September, 1887, from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, covering a Minute of his Executive Council setting forth the value to British Columbia of the present sealing industry in Behring's Sea, together with the opinion of the Executive that the rights of British subjects should have the same protection and consideration on the Pacific as on the Atlantic, and that these rights as regards the Behring's Sea should be included in the scope of the duties of the International Commission in process of organization. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the despatch and inclosures were referred, recommends that a copy of the despatch referred to, with its inclosures, be transmitted to Her Majesty's Government. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of the papers herein mentioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for the information of Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council for Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 82. Lieutenant- Governor Nelson to the Secretary of State, Ottawa. Sir, Harrison Hot Springs, British Columbia, September 15, 1887. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith a copy of a Minute of my Executive Council, approved by me on the 9th instant, representing the value to the Province of British Columbia of the present sealing industry in Behring's Sea, the number of vessels, men, &c, engaged in the same, the loss to the province certain to ensue from the destruction of this trade by the seizures and confiscations made by the United States' cruizers. That the rights of British subjects should have the same protection and consideration on the Pacific as on the Atlantic, and that full compensation and redress for injuries already received, and assurances of future non-interference; should be obtained from the United States' Government. That this question should be included in the scope of the duties of the International Fishery Commission now understood to be in process of organization, and. that it is desirable said Commission should hold some of its sittings in Victoria, for reasons therein set forth, &c. I have, &c. (Signed) HUGH NELSON. Inclosure 4 in No. 82. Province of British Columbia. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Executive Council, approved by his Honour the Lieutenant-Governor on the 9th September, 1887. ON a Memorandum from the Honourable the Minister of Finance and Agriculture, dated the 6th September, 1887, setting forth— That there are usually engaged in seal-fishing in Behring's Sea seventeen vessels wholly owned by people residing in this city, of the aggregate value of 125,000 dollars; That the outfit for each semi-annual voyage of these vessels represents an expenditure of 75,000 dollars, equal to 150,000 dollars a-year; That each of these vessels, on an average, employs a crew of five whites and about twenty Indians, or fifteen to eighteen whites as hunters; l_r-<8"| R 2 K9 124 si $ m That the probable aggregate value of the product of each voyage is 200,000 dollars, ' or 400,000 dollars a-year; That this industry, though as yet only in its infancy, is a very important one for so small a community; That the glaring and unlawful seizures and confiscations in Behring's Sea during last season and the present year are completely crushing out this infant industry, and causing ruin, and, in several known instances, actual distress, to those who have invested their all in the business and relied upon it for a livelihood ; That the destruction of this industry not only entails ruin and distress upon those directly engaged therein, but it affects most injuriously the trade of the province, and drives from these waters a race of hardy and adventurous fishermen, who, with their families, are large consumers, and who would in time become a very important element of strength, if not the nucleus of the future navy of Canada on the Pacific. That the rights and interests of British subjects, whether in fisheries or commerce, are entitled to the same consideration and protection on the Pacific as on the Atlantic, and that it is therefore the duty of the Dominion Government to employ every proper means for obtaining immediate and full compensation and redress for past injuries and wrongs, as well as to guard against the possibility of a repetition of these high-handed outrages in the future; That it is believed to be desirable that this question should be included in the scope of the duties of the International Commission now understood to be in process of organization for the settlement of the fishery disputes existing between Canada and the United States of America; and it is considered most important that the said Commission should hold one or more of its sittings in this city, in order that those more directly acquainted with and interested in the Pacific fisheries may have a better opportunity of being heard and making the Commissioners more thoroughly acquainted with the subject than would otherwise be possible : The Committee advise approval, and that a copy of this Minute be forwarded to the Honourable the Secretary of State for Canada [sic']. Certified, (Signed) JNO. ROBSON, Clerk, Executive Council. No. 83. The Marquis of Salisbury to the British Plenipotentiaries at the Fisheries Conference. — (Substance telegraphed.) Gentlemen, Foreign Office, November 28,1887. I RECEIVED on the 26th instant a telegram from Mr. Chamberlain, inquiring whether a proposal for an International Conference in regard to the Behring's Sea fisheries had been accepted by Her Majesty's Government. You are aware, from the correspondence which is in your possession, that communications with reference to a proposal which would appear to have been addressed to some of the Maritime Powers by the United States for an International Convention for the protection of seals in the Behring's Sea, were received last October from the German and Swedish Charges d'Affaires in London. No definite invitation, however, for an international understanding on this question has yet been received from the Government of the United States by Her Majesty's Government. In answer to a question from Mr. Phelps, I have expressed myself as being favourably disposed to negotiating for an agreement as to a close season in all seal fisheries, to whomsoever belonging, but I carefully separated the question from all controversies as to fishery rights. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. 125 No. 84. The Marquis of Salisbury to the British Commissioners to the Fisheries Conference. Gentlemen, Foreign Office, November 29, 1887. I TRANSMIT herewith, for your information, a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office,* and its inclosures, calling attention to the value to British Columbia of the present sealing industry in Behring's Sea. The Executive Council of the Colony express a desire that this question should be included in the scope of the duties of the Fisheries Conference now sitting at Washington. A copy of the reply which has been returned to the Colonial Office is also inclosed herewith.! I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 85. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, November 29, 1887. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 19th instant, with its inclosures, showing the value to British Columbia of the present sealing industry in Behring's Sea. His Lordship notes the opinion expressed in the Minute of the Executive Council of the Colony that this question should be included in the scope of the duties of the Fisheries Conference now sitting at Washington. I am now to request that, in laying this letter before Secretary Sir H. HoUand, you will state to him that copies of Lord Lansdowne's despatch of the 20th ultimo, and of its inclosures, will be forwarded to the .British Plenipotentiaries at the Conference. I am also to call attention to the instructions in regard to this subject contained in Lord Salisbury's despatch of the 24th ultimo to the British Plenipotentiaries.^ It was then stated that " the question of the seal fisheries in the Behring's Sea . . . has not been specificaUy included in the terms of reference; but you will understand that if the United States' Plenipotentiaries should be authorized to discuss that subject, it would come within the terms of the reference, and that you have full power and authority to treat for a settlement of the points involved in any manner which you may deem advisable, whether by a direct discussion at the present Conference or by a reference to a subsequent Conference to adjust that particular question." Lord Salisbury would suggest, for Sir H. Holland's consideration, that the substance of these instructions should be communicated to the Governor-General of, Canada. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 86. Mr. J. Chamberlain, M.P., to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 12.) My Lord, Washington, November 28, 1887. I HAVE received your Lordship's telegram of this day's date, in reply to mine of the 25th instant. In explanation of the circumstances which led me to address to your Lordship the inquiry contained in my telegram, I should state that Mr. Angell, one of the United States' Plenipotentiaries at the Fishery Conference, stated to me, in the course of a private and confidential conversation, that an invitation had been conveyed to your Lordship, on behalf of the United States, to take part in an International Conference for the protection • No. 82. t No. 85. J See "United States No. 1 (1888)." B9BB mmm lIJlll 126 of the seal fisheries in the Behring's Sea, and that your Lordship had cordially accepted this invitation. I may add that the question of the seal fishery in the Behring's Sea has not yet arisen for discussion at the sittings of the Conference. I have, &c. (Signed) J. CHAMBERLAIN. No. 87. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 26.) Si ir. Downing Street, December 26, 1887. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding revised claims made by the owners of the "Thornton" and " Carolina " for losses sustained on account of the seizure of these vessels by a United States' Revenue vessel in Behring's Sea. The revised claim of the owners of the " Onward," the other vessel seized in 1886' has not yet been received, but Lord Salisbury will know whether it will be advisable to wait for it before putting forward the " Thornton " and " Carolina " claims. I am to request that the inclosures in Lord Landowne's despatch, which are sent in original, may be returned when done with. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 87. Ill The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, December 2, 18S7. WITH reference to your despatch of the 14th September last on the subject of the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' Revenue cruizers, and directing attention to the magnitude of the claims for compensation preferred by the owners against the United States' Government, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting a revised Statement of the losses sustained in the cases of the "Thornton" and " Carolina." My Minister of Marine and Fisheries considers that the claims now made are not unreasonable. You will observe that whereas the amount at first claimed in respect of the seizure of these two vessels was 102,223 dollars, the amount now claimed is 71,130 dol. 66 c. In the case of the " Onward," the third vessel seized, the claim has not yet been returned by the owners. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 87. Certified Copy of a Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 29th November, 1887. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a despatch, dated the 14th September, 1887, from the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, on the subject of the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' Revenue cruizers, and directing attention to certain claims for compensation against the United States' Government. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the despatch and inclosures were referred, stated that the claims (three in number) referred to in this despatch were 127 sent back to the owners of the vessels for revision. In the cases of two of these, the "Thornton" and "Carolina," a full and detailed revised Statement of the losses is submitted herewith. These, the Minister submits, are not unreasonable; the claim for the " Onward," the third vessel seized, has not yet been returned by the owners. The Committee recommend that your Excellency be moved to forward the claims herein mentioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the United States' Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 87. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, of the Dominion of Canada, mariner and ship-owner, solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent of William Munsie, of the city of Victoria aforesaid, the owner of the hereinafter mentioned schooner " Carolina." 2. That the said schooner "Carolina" is a British vessel, registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid, of about tons burden, builders' measurement, and that in a.d. 1884 the " Carolina" was rebuilt and lengthened about 15 feet by a section built amidships, and put in first-class order and condition. In a.d. 1885 the said " Carolina " was valued for insurance by the Union Insurance Company at 4,000 dollars, and in a.d. 1886 the California Insurance Company placed the same value, namely, 4,000 dollars, upon her for a like purpose. I am informed by the said William Munsie, and believe that since the rebuilding and enlargement of the " Carolina," she has not been re-registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid nor at any other port, and that consequently her actual tonnage is greater than appears by the official record, or the register of the said " Carolina." 3. That on or about the 20th day of May, a.d. 1886, the said "Carolina" left the port of Victoria aforesaid, after having been duly cleared at Customs, one James Ogilvie being master, and one James Blake mate, and a crew of nine sailors and hunters, on a fishing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. 4. That on the 1st day of August, in said year 1886, while in said Behring's Sea in north latitude 55° 50', west longitude 168° 53', then being from 65 to 75 miles from the nearest land, and while, as I am informed and verily believe, lawfully pursuing the objects of said voyage, the said schooner " Carolina" was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Corwin," and taken to Ounalaska, in the Territory of Alaska, of the United States of America, and her voyage broken up. 5. That on arrival at Ounalaska aforesaid the "Carolina" was, by order of the United States' authorities, stripped of her outfit and running-gear, the seal-skins on board taken out, the captain, James Ogilvie, and the mate, James Blake, placed under arrest and sent to Sitka, in said Territory of Alaska, and the crew sent to the city of San Francisco. 6. That upon arrival at Sitka the captain and the mate of the " Carolina " were formally charged with having violated the laws of the United States of America respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska, but before the day fixed for the hearing and trial of said charge Captain Ogilvie disappeared, and was afterwards found dead in or about the neighbourhood of Sitka. The mate, James Blake, was tried, found guilty, and sentenced to pay a fine of 300 dollars and be imprisoned at Sitka for thirty days, and which imprisonment he, James Blake, suffered. 7. That hereto annexed, marked (A), is a Statement of the articles comprising the outfit of the schooner " Carolina " on her departure on said voyage, and all of which I verily believe were on board the " Carolina " at the time of" her seizure, excepting only what had been consumed in the ordinary course of the voyage, together with the value of said articles, also of the amount of premiums paid for insurance on the huR, outfit, and cargo of the said " Carolina" for the said voyage; also of the amount of wages paid to the crew and hunters on board the " Carolina " up to the time of such seizure; also of the expenses of the mate and part of the crew in leturning to the B9 mm 128 Sitka, and also at the time of a statement of the number saiidr' seizure, and the value city of Victoria from Ounalaska and of seal-skins on board the "Carolina" thereof. 8. The Exhibit (B) hereto annexed is a Statement of the catch of thirteen sealing-vessels in and about the Behring's Sea during so much of the season of a.d. 1886 as they were in Behring's- Sea. The statement is taken from the Report of the Inspector of Fisheries for the Province of British Columbia for the year 1886, as contained in the Report of the Department of Fisheries for Canada at pages 248 and 249, and I verily say, from personal knowledge of the facts, that the said Statement is substantial, true, and correct. The schooners " Carolina," meaning the "Carolina" herein mentioned, and "Thornton" and "Onward," were seized on the 1st and 2nd August in 1886, and their voyages thus broken Up ; the schooners " Mary Taylor," "Mountain Chief," "Rustler," and "Kate" not having been in Behring's Sea during the season of 1886, the' catch of these above-named schooners are not included in estimating the average catch in Behring's. Sea.for that year. On account of the seizures made on the 1st and 2nd August as aforesaid, and of the schooner "Favorite" being ordered out of the sea by the Commander of. the said "Corwin," the thirteen vessels mentioned in Exhibit (B), with one or two exceptions, left Behring's Sea, or the best sealihg-grounds therein, long before the close of the sealing season, and thus the average catch as found in Exhibit (B) is fully, as I verily believe, 500 skins less than it would have been had they aU remained till the end of the season. 9. That hereto annexed, marked (C), is a Statement of the legal expenses incurred at Sitka and elsewhere by reason of the seizure'of the "Carolina," and the arrest of ker captain and mate as aforesaid, and also of the personal expenses connected therewith. 10. That hereto annexed, marked (D), is a Statement of the damages claimed by the owner of the " Carolina" by reason of her said seizure and detention during the years 1886, 1887, and 1888, based upon the average catch of seal-skins per vessel as found by Exhibit (B). 11. The price per skin charged in Exhibits (A) and (D), namely, 7 dollars, was the market price at Victoria aforesaid at the close of the season of 1886, and was the price which, in the ordinary course of events, would have been realized for said seal-skins had not such seizure taken place. 12. That hereto annexed, marked (E), is an estimate of the principal sums on which interest is claimed, from the 1st day of October, a.d* 1886, on or about which date the catch of the "Carolina" would have been realized on had she not been seized, and also for the actual outlay by her owner prior to that date, arising by reason of the seizure and detention of the " Carolina," the arrest of the captain and mate, and the expenses of the mate and crew in returning to Victoria from Ounalaska and Sitka. 13. That during the month of October, a.d. 1886, and ever since that time, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes at the city of Victoria aforesaid was and now is 7 per cent, per annum. 14. That hereto annexed, marked (F), is a Statement of the items of the outfit of the " Carolina " -when on said voyage and the value thereof, which would have been wholly consumed in the ordinary prosecution of a full season's hunting and fishing voyage. 15. The prices charged for the articles and groups of articles in Exhibit (A), comprising the outfit of the " Carolina," are the market prices of the said articles and groups of articles at Victoria at the time of their purchase for the purposes of said voyage. 16. That as to the item, " Cash on board and unaccounted for, 500 dollars," charged in Exhibit (A), I am informed by the said William Munsie, and do verily believe, that the said sum of 500 dollars was placed on board the " Carolina" at the time of her departure from Victoria as aforesaid, intrusted to^the master, James Ogilvie, for use in cases of emergency or unforeseen expenditures, and I verily believe that said sum of 500 dollars was on board the " Carolina " at the time of her seizure; but owing to the death of Captain Ogilvie at Sitka, it was not known by the said owner what became of the said sum of 500 dollars. 17. That at the time of the seizure of the " Carolina'' she was in good order and condition, having been thoroughly overhauled before starting out on said voyage, and not having sustained any damage beyond ordinary wear and tear during said voyage up to the time of her seizure. 129 18. That the value placed on the " Carolina," namely,: 4,000 doUars, is a fair and reasonable valuation of the said schooner, and from my personal knowledge of the "Carolina," and the value of vessels of her class at Victoria, I verily believe that she could not be replaced by a vessel in all respects as good and as well adapted to the purposes for which she was used for a less sum than 4,000 dollars^ 19. That on or about the 13th day of July last past I was at Ounalaska aforesaid, and saw and was on board of the said schooner " Carolina." She.was (hen lying anchored in the harbour at Ounalaska, stripped of all her outfit and running gear. Her standing rigging was much weather-beaten, her iron work much rusted, her deck seems in a bad state, and I verily believe, from the condition in which the " Carolina " then was, and in view of the fact that she must remain so exposed until least next May (a.d. 1888), it will cost at least 4,000 dollars to put her in as good repair and condition as when seized and return her to Victoria. To be taken to Victoria under ordinary circumstances would alone cost between 2,500 and 3,000 doUars. 20. That the "Carolina" at the time of her seizure was insured in the California Insurance Company for the sum of 2,500 dollars on her hnll, and in the sum of 1,000 doUars on her outfit and cargo. 21. That the estimated loss of 5,000 dollars for each of the years 1887 and 1888 by reason of the seizure and detention of the " Carolina " as aforesaid is based upon an average catch of 2,380 seal-skins for each of the said years, at 5^ doUars per skin, which was the market value per skin at Victoria at the close of the season of 1887, after deducting therefrom the cost of outfit and wages, based on the " Carolina's " voyage of a.d. 1886. And I, James Douglas Warren, aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting extrajudicial oaths. ./ Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the county of Carleton, in the Province of Ontario, this 28th day of November, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) J. D. WARREN. (Signed) W. D. Hogg, Notary Public for Ontario. Exhibit (A). Value of the schooner " Carolina " at the time of seizure Outfit- Groceries .. .. .. Ammunition .. .. Six short guns . . . Five rifles .. .. Gun implements and tools .. Dry goods .. .. .. Ship chandlery Water casks " .. .. Chronometer .. .. Four canoes and outfit One boat .. .. Salt Coal and wood for fuel - Cooking stove and utensils .. Miscellaneous .. .. Cash on board and unaccounted for ' Two sextants .. .. Insurance premium and survey fee on 2,500 dollars on hull and 1,000 dollars on outfit and cargo .. .. .. .. Wages paid to hunters and crews for voyage up to time of seizure . 1,332 22 Part of crew having been sent to San. Francisco by United States' authorities, board of five men at San Francisco and passage- money thence to Victoria .. .. .. .. Passage-money and expenses of mate, James Blake, from Sitka to Victoria after release from prison .. .. Dol. c. Dol. c. •• 4,000 00 598 60 173 34 300 00 130 00 17 29 71 37 5 ** 376 83 12 00 160 00 248 50 100 oo 81 00 37 62 79 00 42 34 500 00 75 00 3.002 89 352 50 686 seal-skins on board the "Carolina1 returned, at 7 dollars per skin .. Total Exhibit (A) .. when seized, and not 71 72 100 00 2,003 94 • • 4,802 00 14,161 33 ("128] *p 130 Exhibit (B) .—Number of seal-skins taken by each of the following thirteen sealing vessels during the year 1886 in and about the Behring's Sea, most of the said vessels leaving the sea before the end of the season fearing capture. lis M •r- Vessels. Number of Seal-skins. *.$£ Pathfinder .. .. .. .. .. .. Mary Ellen .. .. .. .. •• .. Theresa .. .. .. .. .. .. Favourite .. .. .. .. .. .. Black Diamond .. .. .. •. •. '$■ -.. Alfred Adams .. .. .. .. .. ■y. Active .. .. .. .. ... ... City of Santiago .. .. .. •• Silvia Handy .. .. .. •'' 11 Dolphin .. .. .. .. .. -• Anna Beck .. .. .. .. .. .. Grace .. .. .. . • • • • • rv..- Sayward .. .. •• •• •• .. 1,766 4,256 2,625 2,325 1.760 2,465 2,275 1,620 1,587 2,601 1,400 2,550 2,725 ■il,.; Total catch .. .. • • 30,955 Average per vessel .. 2,381 pM Exhibit (C). Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with the seizure-of the " Carolina " .. Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and about the seizure of the " Carolina," and the claims arising thereunder, exclusive of the above' 500 dollars .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Personal expenses other than the above in the same connection .. .. JL O till • • # • ' •« •• • • • * Dol. 500 750 250 c. 00 00 00 1,500 00 Exhibit (D).—Estimated damages arising from the seizure and detention of tho schooner " Carolina" based on the average catch per vessel as given in Exhibit (B), season 1886. Average catch of seals .. .. .. .. .. Less on board at seizure, and charged in Exhibit (A) .. .. Balance at 7 dollars per skin .. ' .. ., Reasonable and probable profit on operations for year 1887 . . " Carolina" not being released and not available to eagage in next year's operations, reasonable and probable profit for 1888 ,. .. .. .. .. ., No. 689 Dol. 1,695=11,865 00 Dol. c. 5,000 00 5,000 00 10,000 00 Total of Exhibit (D) 21,865 00 .Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which interest is so claimed. Value of "Carolina's" estimated catch for 1886—namely, 2,381 skins, at 7 dollars per skin—from the 1st day of October, a.d 1886, when the. catch would Lave been realized on.. .. .. .. .. Actual cash outlay for legal and other necessary expenses incurred by reason of the said seizure .. .. Total principal on which interest is claimed from October, a.d. 1886, to date of payment of claim .. .. „ ;i Estimated value of the "Carolina" catch for 1887, less cost of outfit and wages of crew and hunters, on which interest at 7 per cent, is claimed from 1st October, a.d. 1887, on or about which date the catch would be realized on to date of payment .. .. .. .. .. If the claim for 1887 be not allowed, then interest is claimed on the value of the "Carolina" from 1st October, 1886, to date of payment .. .. .. Dol. 16,667 00 500 00 Dol. c. 17,167 00 ssffissffisgs 131 Exhibit (E).—Details of items of " CaroUna's " outfit consumed during the course of a fuU hunting and sealing voyage. Groceries .. Ammunition Dry goods ■. Ship chaudelry Salt " Coal and wood Miscellaneous Wages of crew Total value consumed.. .. .. 3,213 32 Dol. c. 598 60 173 34 71 37 376 83 81 00 37 62 42 34 1,832 22 Inclosure 4 in No. 87. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, of the Dominion of Canada, mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as f oUows:—- 1. That I am a British subject by birth. 2. That I was sole owner of the British steam-schooner "Thornton," 78 tons burden by buUders' measurement, registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid, before and at the time of her seizure hereinafter set out by the "United States' steam-ship 1 Corwin." 3. That the said steam-schooner " Thornton " was rebuUt by me in a.d. 1887,* at a cost of 3,500 doUars, and in a.d. 1880 and a.d. 1881 was fitted up with steam propelling power at an additional cost of 3,000 doUars. Her bottom and sides of above light water-line were coppered and copper fastened. 4. That on or about the 16th day of May, 1886, the said steam-schooner " Thornton " was regularly cleared at the port of Victoria aforesaid for a fuU season of about four months' fishing and hunting in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and that on or about the 27th day of said month of May the " Thornton" finaUy saUed from Clayoquot Sound, on the south.-west of Vancouver Island, on said fishing and hunting voyage. 5. The master of the "Thornton" on and for said voyage was one Hans Guttormsen, of the said city of Victoria, and the mate one Harry Norman, of the same place, and a crew of thirteen men. 6. That on the 1st day of August, a.d. 1886, while in Behring's Sea in north latitude 55° 45' and west longitude 168° 44', lawfuUy, as I verily beHeve, pursuing the objects of said voyage, the said steam-schooner " Thornton | was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Corwin," and by the " Corwin " taken to Ounalaska, in the United States' Territory of Alaska, and her voyage was broken up. 7. That on arrival at Ounalaska the said " Thornton " was, by order of the United States' authorities, stripped of her outfit and running gear, the seal-skins then on board taken out, the captain and mate made prisoners and sent to Sitka, in said Territory of Alaska, where, after trial, they were fined, the captain in the sum of 500 doUars and the mate in the sum of 300 doUars, and each imprisoned for thirty i days. The remainder of the crew, with only two excepted, were sent by the United States' authorities to the city of San Erancisco by a steamer belonging to the Alaska Commercial Company. 8. That I am informed by Captain Guttormsen that immediately upon the arrival at Ounalaska of the " Corwin " with the " Thornton," he (the captain) entered his solemn protest against the seizure of his vessel and her outfit and the seal-skins then on board. 9. That on or about the 13th day of July of the present year I was at Ounalaska, and saw the said steam-schooner " Thornton," and found her in a very bad condition. She was lying on her bilge on a gravel beach, partially embedded, and exposed to aU weathers, and was consequently greatly depreciated in value since her seizure. Her copper is much chafed, her deck seams are opened, through which water had leaked upon the steam-boUer, engine, and machinery, aU of which' are weU She cannot be brought away from. Ounalaska without repairs involving nigh ruined [128] Qy. 1877. S 2 i?8 '. £''^ III 132 great expense, and not at all before next summer can this be done. I verily believe, from the inspection I then made, that it would cost over 6,000 dollars to take the "Thornton" from Ounalaska to Victoria aforesaid, the nearest port at which the repairs could be made, and put her in as good order and condition as she was in when seized. 10. That at the time of her seizure "the "Thornton" was in good repair and condition and. perfectly seaworthy, excepting only that her mainmast-head had been carried away during the voyage she then was on. 11. That for and- during the said voyage the " Thornton " was insured by Lloyd's underwriters in the sum of 1,200Z. on the hull and machinery, and in the sum of 1,000/. on the outfit and cargo. 12. That hereto annexed, marked (A), is a detailed Statement of the outfit of the " Thornton " for the voyage on which she was seized as above set out, and aU of which, excepting only what had been consumed in the regular course of the voyage, was on board the "Thornton" at the time of her seizure; also of the amount of premiums paid by me for insurance upon the hull, machinery, outfit, and cargo of the | Thornton " during the said voyage, and also for wages paid by me to the hunters and crew of the said " Thornton " of said voyage for the time of said voyage up to the said seizure. Also, a Statement of the sums paid by me for passage money of the crew from San Erancisco to Victoria, and passage money and expenses of the captain and mate at and from Sitka after their release to Victoria aforesaid. 13. That also in said Statement (A) are charged 403 seal-skms taken from the "Thornton" at the time of seizure, and which, so appears from the Report of the officers of the United States' steam-ship " Corwin," submitted to the Court at Sitka on the trial of the said captain and mate of the " Thornton," and the price there charged, namely, 7 doUars per skin, was the market value per skin at Victoria aforesaid, on or about the 1st October, a.d. 1886, when the said skins, had not such seizure taken place, would have been placed on the market at Victoria. 14. That the value placed upon the various articles and groups of articles in the outfit mentioned in Exhibit (A) is the actual cost of the said articles at the city of Victoria aforesaid at the time of their purchase in the spring of 1886. 15. That hereto annexed, marked (B), is a Statement showing the number of seal-skins taken by each one of thirteen sealing-schooners in and about Behring's Sea during the season of 1886. The said Statement is based upon the Report of the Inspector of Fisheries for the Province of British Columbia for the year 1886, as contained in the Report of the Minister of Marine and Eisheries for Canada for said year at pp. 248 and 249. The schooners " Carolina," " Onward," and said steam-schooner " Thornton " were seized on the 1st and 2nd August of said year when the sealing season was not half over, and the schooners "Mary Taylor," "Mountain Chief," "Rustler," and "Kate" were not in Behring's Sea during the . season of 1886, so that in calculating the average catch for the Behring's Sea fleet, the catch of the seven above-mentioned schooners was not included. With one or two exceptions the thirteen sealing-schooners, mentioned in Exhibit (B), left Behring's Sea, or the best fishing grounds therein, long before the end of the said season, as their masters feared seizure by the United States' authorities, and the said average catch, so found by Exhibit (B), is therefore fully 500 less than it otherwise would have been. 16. That hereto annexed, marked (C), is a Statement of the amount of legal expenses paid and incurred by me at Sitka and elsewhere, and also of the amount ot my personal expenses incurred by reason of the said seizure. 17. That hereto annexed, marked (D), is a Statement showing the estimated loss incurred by me as owner of the said " Thornton," by reason of the said seizure and detention, and of the seizure and detention of the seal-skins then on board the "Thornton," and the breaking up of the said sealing voyage. Also, the estimated loss incurred by me during the present year by reason of the non-release of the "Thornton;" and in view of the fact that it is now too late to put the '• Thornton" in repair and condition to engage in next year's business, the estimated loss for next year. And I verily believe that the said estimates of the losses incurred by me by reason of the seizure and detention of the said " Thornton " for the years 1886,1887, and 1888, are fair and reasonable estimates, and rather under than over the actual losses so sustained. 18. That the estimated loss of 5,000 dollars for each of the years 1887 and 1888, by reason of the seizure and detention of the "Thornton," is based upon an average catch of 2,380 seal-skins valued at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin, the market value at Victoria for the present season, deducting from the gross value thereof the cost of outfit and amount of the wages of hunters and crew, based on the '.'Thornton's" voyage of a.d. 1886. 19. That during and since the year 1886 7 per cent. per.annum was, and now is, the minimum rate at which money for ordtnary commercial purposes. could be obtained at the city of Victoria aforesaid,.and that hereto annexed, marked (E), is an estimate of the principal sums on which interest is claimed at. the rate of 7 per cent, per annum, and the time for which it is so claimed. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this'solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting extra-judicial oaths. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the county of Carleton, this 25th day of November, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) J. D. WARREN. (Seal.) (Signed) D. B. MacTavish, Notary Public. -Exhibit (A). Value of steam-schooner "Thornton" at time of seizure by United States'steam-ship "Corwin" .. .. .. .. Value of " Thornton's " outfit- Groceries .. .. .. .. .. .. Ammunition .. .. .. .. .. ., Dry goods .. .. Iron water tanks ., .. .. .. .. .. Ship chandlery for sealing purposes .. .. .. One chronometer .. .. .. .. .. Extra suit of new sails .. .. .. .. .. Seven No. 10 shotguns.. ... .. .. .. Five rifles .. .. .. ,. .. .. Gun implements and tools j .. .. .. .. Four new sealing boats and sails .. .. .. .. Water casks .. .. .. .. .. .. 6 tons salt .. .. ... .. .. .. 18 tons coal .. .. .. .. .. .. Cooking range and utensils .. .. .. .. Insurance- Premium on 1,200/.- Premium on 1,000/.- Total outfit .. .. .. -insurance on hull,' 1012. 4c .. .. -insurance on outfit and cargo, 201. Ss. 4rf.. Wages paid hunters and crew up to time of seizure, hunters and crew having been taken to San Francisco by United States' authorities .. .. .. .. .. ., Passage mouey thence to Victoria •. .. .. Passage money and expenses of Captain Guttormsen and mate, Harry Norman, after release from Sitka to Victoria .. .. 403 seal-skins on board the " Thornton" at the time of seizure, at 7 dollars per skin S .. .. .. ' .. .. Total Dol. c. Dol. c. • • 6,000 0Q 533 37 340 26 49 88 50 00 278 64 81 45 307 18 248 00 125 96 23 20 612 70 25 00 90 00 126 00 50 00 2,941 •• 64 492 83 98 60 591 43 1,370 00 177 16 200 00 2,821 00 4,568 •• 16 Total of Exhibit (A) (Signed) 14,101 23 D. B. MaoTAVISH, Notary Public. r»h IS | 134 MT! I Lie*! Exhibit (B).—Number of seals taken by the foUowing thirteen sealing schooners during the year 1886 in and about the Behring's Sea, most of the thirteen leaving the sea before the end of the season, fearing capture. Schooners— Pathfinder .. Mary Ellen .. Theresa Favorite .. Black Diamond Alfred Adams.. Active .. City of Santiago. Silvia Handy .. Dolphin Anna Beck Grace .. Sayward .. Total catch Average per vessel (Signed) No. of Seals. 1,766 4,256 2,625 3,325 1,760 2,465 2,275 1,620 1,587 2,601 1,400 2,550 2,725 30,955 • • • •• 2,o81 D. B. MacTAVISH, Notary Public. Exhibit (C). Dol. c. Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with seizure of " Thornton " .. 500 00 Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and about the claims arising from said seizure .. .. .. .. .. .. 750 00 Travelling, hotel, and other necessary expenses in connection with said seizure and claims .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,000 00 Grand total, Exhibit (C) (Signed) .. 2,250 00 D. B. MacTAVISH, Notary Public. Exhibit (D).—Damages arising from the seizure and detention of the " Thornton," based upon the average catch of seal-skins per season as given in Statement (B), season of 1886. No. Dol. c. Estimated average catch .. .. .. .. .. 2,381 Less 403 skins on board the " Thornton " at the time of seizure, and charged in Statement (A) .. .. .. .. 403 Balance, at 7 dollars per skin .. .. Reasonable and probable profit " Thornton" would have earned in 1887 for owner .. .. .. ..' .. In view of fact that " Thornton " cannot be made available for next year's operations, reasonable and probable profit for 1 o o 0 .. .. .. . . . * • • 1,978 = 13,846 00 ... 5,000 00 5,000 00 Total amount, Exhibit (D) (Signed) 23,846 00 D. B. MacTAVISH, Notary Public. 185 Summary of Exhibts. Value of" Thornton" .. .. .. .. .. Value of "Thornton's" outfit Wages of crew and hunters .. .. .. .. Passage money and expenses of officers and crew in returning to Victoria .. .. .. .. .. .. 403 seal-skins, at 7 dollars .. .. .. .. Dol. 6,000 3,533 1,370 377 2,821 c. 00 07 00 16 00 DoL c. Total, Exhibit (A) Personal expenses of owner .. .. .. .. Legal expenses.. .. .. .. .. .. 1,000 1,250 00 00 14,101 23 Total, Exhibit (C) Balance on estimated seal catch for 1886 .. .. Estimated loss to owner by detention of the "Thornton" during 1887 .. .. .. .. .. Estimated loss on same grounds for 1888 .. .. ,. 13,846 5,000 5,000 00 00 00 2,250 00 Total, Exhibit (D) 23,846 00 Total amount of claim .. .. .. 40,197 23 Memorandum. If the owner of the "Thornton" is indemnified for balance of estimated seal catch for year 1886, there should be deducted from the total claim the sum of 3,379 dol. 58 c. included in Exhibit (A) for outfit, which would necessarily have been consumed in the prosecution of the voyage, and including the sum of 1,370 dollars paid in wages, as per Exhibit (E). Dol. e. Totalclaim .. .. .. .. .. ... .. 40,197 23 Value consumed on voyage .. .. .. .. ,. 3,379 58 Net claim .. .. .. .. .. 36,817 65 (Signed) D. B. MacTAVISH, Notary Public. Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which interest is so claimed. Dol. c. Value of I Thornton's " estimated full catch for 1886, namely, 2,381 skins, at 7 dollars per skin, from the 1st October, 1886, when the catch would have been realized on .. .. .. .. .. 16,667 00 Actual cash outlay for legal and other necessary expenses incurred by reason of the seizure before the 1st October, 1886.. .. .. 500 00 Total principal on which interest is claimed since the 1st October, 1886, to date of payment of claim .. .. .. .. .. 17,167 00 Estimated value of the " Thornton " catch for 1887, less cost of outfit and wages of crew and hunters, on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed from the 1st October, 1887, on or about which date the catch would be realized on, to date of payment .. .. .. 5,000 00 If the claim for 1887 be not allowed, then interest is claimed on the value of the " Thornton " at 7 per cent, per annum from the 1st October, a.d. 1886, to time of payment.. .. .. .. .. 6,000 00 (Signed) D. B. MacTAVISH, Notary Public. 18$: Exhibit (F).—Details of items of " Thornton's " outfit consumed during the course of .-.■/: | full sealing and fishing voyage. Groceries .. Ammunition .. .. Dry goods ... Ship chandelry..." ,ji .. Insurance premiums Wages of crew and hunters 6 tons salt .. .'. 18 tons coal .. .. Items. Total value consumed (Signed) Dol. c. 533 37 340 26 49 88 278 64 591 43 1,370 00 90 00 126 00 3,379 58 D. B. MacTAVISH, Notary Public. ' No. 88. Sir L. We~st to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received January 16.) My Lord, Washington, January 5,1888. WITH reference to my despatches of the 2nd April last and of the 6th May, I have the honour to inform your Lordship that I am advised that the case of the American sealing-schooner " Sierra M will probably be dismissed, on the ground that the Captain of the Revenue cruizer was acting under tbe instructions of the Government, and that the plaintiff therefore would have to apply to Congress. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 89. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—{Received January 16.) Sir, Downing Street, January 14, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this- Department of the 26th ultimo, relating to the seizure of Canadian sealing-schooners in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Secretary Sir Henry Holland to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, inclosing an approved Report of a Committee of his Privy Council, submitting a revised statement of the loss sustained in the •oase of the schooner " Onward." I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 89. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. "Sir, Government House, Ottawa, December 23, 1887. WITH reference to your despatch of the 14th September last, directing attention to the magnitude of the claims for compensation prepared by the owners of the British sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea by United States' Revenue cruizers, and to my despatch of the 2nd instant, I have the honour to forward herewith, for transmission to the United States' Government, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting a revised statement of tbe loss sustained in the case of the schooner " Onward." You will observe that my Minister of Marine and Fisheries considers that the claim now made is not unreasonable. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 89. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, December 20, 1887. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a despatch, dated the 14th September, 1887, from the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, on the subject of the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' Revenue cruizers, and directing attention to certain claims for compensation against the United States' Government. 137 The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the despatch and incisures wer referred, stales, that the claims (three in number') referred to in this despatch were sent back to the owners of the vessels for tevraon. In the cases of two of these, the "Thornton" and "Carolina," a full and detailed revised statement of the losses has already been submitted, and he (the Minister) submits herewith a revised statement of the loss to the owners of the schooner " Onward " on account of the seizure of said vessel. This claim the Minister considers to be a reasonable one. The Committee recommend thai your Excellency be moved to forward the claim herein mentioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies for transmission to the United States' Government. All which is respectfully submitted for vour Excellency's approval. ;. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 89. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent of Charles Spring, merchant, of the said city of Victoria, and owner of the hereinafter-mentioned schooner " Onward." 2. That the said schooner " Onward " is a British vessel of about 94 tons burden, builder's measurement, and at the time of her seizure, as hereinafter set out, was, and now is, registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid. 3. That about the 10th day of June, A.n. 1886, the said schooner " Onward " sailed from the west coast of Vancouver Island, having previously cleared at the port of Victoria aforesaid, on and for a full-season hunting and fishing voyage in tbe North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. 4. That on and for said voyage the crew of the | Onward" consisted of Daniel Monroe, of Victoria aforesaid, master; John Margotich, of the same place, mate; and twenty sailors and hunters; all of whom were on board the " Onward " at the time of her seizure hereinafter mentioned. 5. That on the morning of the 2nd August, a.d. 1886, while in said Behring's Sea, in north latitude 54° 32' and west longitude 167° 55', and about 68 miles from Ounalaska Island, the nearest land, lawfully, as I verily believe, pursuing the objects of her said voyage, the " Onward " was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Corwin," and taken in tow of said " Corwin" to Ounalaska, in the Territory of Alaska, of the United States of America, having then on board 400 seal-skins. 6. That upon the said | Corwin's" arrival at Ounalaska aforesaid with the said "Onward," the "Onward" was, by order of the United States' authorities thereat, stripped of her sails and outfit, the skins on board taken out, her master, the said Daniel Monroe, and mate, the said John Margotich, placed under arrest, and her voyage completely broken up. 7. That the said master and mate, Daniel Monroe and John Margotich, were by the said United States' authorities taken to Sitka, iu the said Territory of Alaska, there to be tried on a charge of having violated the laws of the United States respecting seal fishing in the waters of Alaska. On arrival at Sitka the said master and mate were bound over to appear for trial on said charge, and were on or about the 1st of the month of September following so tried, found guilty, and sentenced—the master, Daniel Monroe, to pay a fine of 500 dollars, the mate, John Margotich, to pay a fine of 300 dollars, and each to be imprisoned for the space of thirty days, which imprisonment they suffered. 8. That hereto annexed, marked " (A)," is a statement of the articles comprising the outSt of the "Onward" at the time of her departure on said voyage, and the value thereof, all of which were on board the "Onward" at the time ot her said seizure, excepting only what had been consumed in the ordinary course and prosecution of the voyage; also of the amount paid for insurance on said voyage, also the amount of wages paid the crew and hunters on said voyage also the amount paid for fares and expenses of the master and mate in returning to Victoria from Sitka after their release, and also of the number and value of the seal-skins on board the "Onward" at the time of her seizure, and which were taken from the " Onward" at Ounalaska by the United States' authorities. 9. That the prices charged for the various articles and groups of articles comprising [128] T mwan 138 thfe outfit of the " Onward "on and for said voyage are the regular market prices of the said articles at Victoria aforesaid at the time of their purchase for use on said voyage.' The price charged in said statement for the seal-skins on board the "Onward" when seized, namely, 7 dollars per skin, was the market price per skin at Victoria aforesaid at' the close of the sealing season of 1886, when the catch of the " Onward," had not such'• seizure taken place, would have been placed on the market. 10. That the value of the schooner "Onward," as given in Exhibit (A), namely, 4,000 dollars, is a fair and reasonable value for the said schooner at the time of her seizure; she was then, and had always been, kept in first class order and condition, and was always a staunch, seaworthy vessel, and for the said voyage had been refitted with' new sails and sailing gear. 11. That hereto annexed, marked "B," is a statement of the catch of thirteen sealing- vessels, in and about Behring's Sea, during the season of 1886 ; the said statement is compiled from the Report of the Inspector of Fisheries for the Province of British Columbia for the year 1886, as contained in the Report of the Department of Fisheries for Canada for that year at pp. 248 and 249, and from personal knowledge of the facts therein set out, I verily believe the said statement to be substantially true and correct.. The steam-schooner "Thornton," the schooners "Carolena" and "Onward," meaning the "Onward" herein mentioned, were seized on the 1st and 2nd August, 1886, in Behring's Sea, at the beginning of the best sealing period; and the schooners " Mary Taylor," "Mountain Chief," "Rustler," and "Kate" were not in Behring's Sea during the season1 of 1886, so in estimating the average catch per vessel in Behring's Sea for 1886, the catch of the above-named seven vessels is not included in Exhibit (B); all of the thirteen vessels named in Exhibit (B), with only one or two exceptions, left Behring's Sea long before the end of the sealing season of 1886, because of the seizures which had been made by the United States' steam-ship | Corwin," fearing to remain lest they also should be seized ; by reason of such departure from the said sea, or the best sealing grounds therein, before the close of the season, I verily believe that the catch per vessel, as found in Exhibit (B), namely, 2,381 seal-skins, is fully 500 less than it would have been had' the said vessels remained the full season in said sea. 12. That hereto annexed, marked | (C)," is a statement of the legal expenses incurred at Sitka and elsewhere by reason of the said seizure of the " Onward," the arrest and imprisonment of the said master and mate, and the claims arising therefrom, and also of the personal expenses of the said owner and said agent in the same connection. 13. That the Exhibit (D), hereto annexed, is a statement of the estimated loss and damage resulting to the owner of the " Onward " by reason of her seizure and detention in a.d. 1886, a.d. 1887, and a.d. 1888. The estimated loss for the year 1886 is based upon the average catch per vessel, as found in Exhibit (B), less the number of skins on board the i Onward " when seized, the balance being valued at 7 dollars per skin, the price per skin at Victoria at the close of the season 1886. The claim for a.d. 1887 and a.d. 1888 is based upon the same average catch as for a.d. 1886, valued at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin, which was the market value per skin at Victoria aforesaid at the close of the season 1887, after deducting therefrom the cost of outfit and wages of crew and- hunters for each year, based on the i Onward's " said voyage of a.d. 1886. The said claim of 5,000 dollars' for each of said years a.d. 1887 and a.d. 1888 is a fair and reasonable estimate of the earnings of the "Onward " in hunting and fishing for the said years. 14. That Exhibit (E), hereto annexed, is a statement of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which said interest is so claimed. At the time when the catch of the " Onward " for 1886 would have, in the ordinary course of events, been realized on, namely, on or about the 1st October in said- year, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes was, has since continued to be, and now is, 7 per cent, per annum. 15. That hereto annexed, marked "(F)," is a statement of the articles, and the value thereof, as given in Exhibit (A) of the " Onward's" outfit on said voyage of 1886, including insurance premiums and wages, which would necessarily be wholly, or almost wholly,- consumed in the course of a full season's hunting and fishing, such as contemplated by the " Onward " in 1886. 16. That on the i3th day of July last past I was at Ounalaska aforesaid, and was then on board of the said schooner " Onward." She was then lying side-to on a gravel beach, in the harbour at Ounalaska, partially embedded in the gravel, and generally in a very bad condition. Her standing rigging was much weather-beaten, also her deck and side-seams were in a very bad state, the long exposure and severe frosts of the previous winter having broken out the pitch, and, judging from their appearance, they were very leaky From what I then saw of the condition of the " Onward," I verily believe that she could ,139 not be floated and put in a fit state for sea without extensive repairs, which at Ounalaska, where there is neither the requisite workmen nor material, would involve very large expenditure, and that to float fhe'"said " Onward," take her to Victoria aforesaid, the nearest port where the requisite facilities exist, and where she could be repaired and refitted at .least cost, and there repair and refit her, would cost at least 4,500 dollars. And I, Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton, in the Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public for Ontario. Exhibit (A). Value of the schooner " Onward ' at the time of her seizure Outfit- Groceries .. .. .. .. Ammunition .. .. .. .. Dry goods .. .. .. Ship chandlery .. .. .. .. Four shot guns .. .. Three iron water-tanks . .. *.. .. Fourteen water-casks.. .. Nino canoes and outfit .. .. .. OdlX .. .. .. .. .. VvOtU .. .. e . •• •■ Cooking stove and utensils .. .. .. Chronometer, sextant, and two flags Three extra compasses Sundries .. .. .. .. .. Insurance premium and survey on hull .. Wages paid to hunters and crew for voyage .. . . Fines and expenses of captain and mate from Sitka to Victoria 400 seal-skins on board, at 7 dollars per skin.. Dol. c. Dol. c. • • 470 70 4,000 00 • • 19 07 68 25 • • 251 59 61 00 57 00 21 00 445 50 52 57 13 80 56 63 140 00 2 . 24 00 • • 97 58 1,778 69 •• •• 260 00 1,820 00 after release. 200 00 .. 2,800 00 (Signed) Total, Exhibit (A) .. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. .. 10,858 69 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (B).—Number of Seal-skins taken by each of the following thirteen Sealing-vessels during the year 1886, in and about the Behring's Sea, most of the said vessels leaving the Sea before the end of th e said Season fearing seizure :— Vessels. Seal-skins. Pathfinder 1,766 Mary Ellen • • # m , m .. 4,256 Theresa .. « . .. * • .. 2,625 Favorite .. m % # # #. # # 2,325 Black Diamond . , # m . # #, 1,760 Alfred Adams # ^ ,., m. „ # 2,465 Active , , .. .. .. 2,275 City of Santiago . # «. a , .. 1,620 Silvia Handy . I *. . I .« 1,587 Dolphin .. , . ., # # .. 2,601 Anna Beck . » #. . # .. 1,400 Grace .. . 'i • • , , .. 2,550 W. P. Sayward tch i per vessel «• .. 2,725 Total cs 30,955 Averagf 2,881 (Signed) [128] (Signed) D. O'Connor. Notary Public. J. D. WARREN. T 2 Exhibit (D).—Estimated Damages arising from the Seizure and Schooner | Onward," based on the average Catch per Vessel for Exhibit (B). BfcRtj 140 Exhibit (C). Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with the seizure of the " Onward " .. Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and about the seizure of the " Onward," and the claims arising thereunder, exclusive of the above 500 dollars .. .. .. .. .. .. .. Personal expenses other than the above in the same connection .. J.otai.. *. .. .. .. .. (Signed) J. D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. c. 500 00 750 00 250 00 1,500 00 D. WARREN Average catch seal .. .. .. Less number on board at seizure, and charged in Exhibit (A). Balance, at 7 dollars per skin 2,381 400 1,981 = Reasonable and probable profit on operations for the year 1887 " Onward" not being released, and not available to engage in next year's operations, reasonable and probable profit for 1888 .. Total, Exhibit (D) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Detention of the 1886, as given in Dol. c. 13,867 00 5,000 00 5,000 00 23,867 00 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the Principal Sums on which Interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the Time for which interest is so claimed. Dol. c. Value of the "Onward's" estimated catch for 1886, namely, 2,381 skins, at 7 dollars per skin, from the 1st day of October, a.d. 1886, when the catch would have been realized on .. Actual outlay for legal and other necessary expenses incurred by reason of the seizure of the " Onward " before the 1st October, 1886 16,667 00 500 00 Total principal on which interest is claimed from October a.d- 1886, to date of payment of claim .. .. .. .. Estimated value of "Onward's" catch for 1887 (less cost of outfit and wages of crew and hunters) on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed from the 1st October, a.d. 1887, on or about which date the catch would be realized on, to date of payment If claim for 1887 be not allowed, then interest is claimed on the value of the " Onward" from the 1st October, a.d. 1886, to date of payment .. 17,167 00 5,000 00 4,000 00 (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (F).—Value of Articles of 1 Onward's" Outfit, which would have been wholly or almost wholly consumed on a full Hunting and Fishing Trip. Groceries .. Ammunition Dry goods .. Ship chandlery .. Salt Coal Wages.. Insurance premiums (Signed) Total consumption during voyage.. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. c. 470 70 19 07 68 25 251 59 52 57 13 80 1,820 00 260 00 2,955 98 D. WARREN. Memo. If the full claim for the sealing season of 1886, as set out in Exhibit (B), be allowed, then the amount of this Exhibit, 2,955 dol. 98 c. will properly appear as a credit, and be deducted from the total of Exhibit (A), of which it forms part. % 141 No. 90. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received January 23.) Sir, Downing Street, January 28, 1888. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, to be laid before tbe Marquis of Salisbury, with reference to previous correspondence, copies of two despatches from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding statements of claims for losses sustained by certain British vessels engaged in the Behrine's Sea seal fishery. I am to request that these claims may be presented to the United States' Government should Lord Salisbury see no objection thereto. I am to request that the sub-inclosures in these despatches, which are sent in original, may be returned. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 90. The Marquis of Lansdowne io Sir H. Holland. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, January 4, 1888.' I HAVE the honour to transmit to you, for presentation to the United States' Government, a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council of Canada, submitting a detailed statement of the claim of the owner and agent of the schooner "Favorite," which vessel was, on the 2nd August, 1886, while sealing in Behring's Sea, about 68 miles from land, ordered by the United States'steamer "Corwin," under threat of seizure, to cease operations and leave the Behring's Sea forthwith. You will observe that the circumstances connected with this claim differ from all the others, inasmuch as no actual seizure was effected, but my Minister of Marine and Fisheries considers that the claim for loss of the fishing season is not unreasonable. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 90. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 30th December, 1887. ON a Report dated the 19th December, 1887, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting a detailed statement of the claim of the owner and agent of the schooner "Favorite," which vessel was, on the 2nd day of August, 1886, while sealing in the Behring's Sea, not far from where the schooner " Onward " was seized the same day, viz., north latitude n4° 32', west longitude 167° 55', about 68 miles from land, ordered by -the United States' steamer "Corwin," under threat of seizure, to cease operations and leave the Behring's Sea forthwith. The Minister represents that the circumstances connected with this claim differ from all the others, inasmuch as no actual seizure was effected, but the Minister believes the claim for loss of the fishing season to be reasonable. The Minister recommends that it be forwarded to Her Majesty's Government for presentation to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward the claim herein menlioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the United States' Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and' ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 142 li-iLlr 1. I am the duly authorized agent of Charles Spring, merchant, of Victoria aforesaid, the owner of the hereinafter mentioned schooner " Favorite." 2. That the schooner " Favorite "herein referred to is a British vessel of 80 tons, registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid, and was so registered at the time of the occurrence hereinafter set out, namely, on the 1st and 2nd days of August, a.d. 1886. 3. That towards the end of the month of May a.d. 1886, after having been duly cleared at the port of Victoria aforesaid, for that purpose, the said schooner " Favorite " sailed on and for a full season's hunting and fishing in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. 4. That on and for said voyage the crew of the said "Favorite" consisted of Alexander McLean, of Victoria aforesaid, master, a mate, and twenty-three sailors and , hunters, and completely equipped and provisioned for a full season of hunting and fishing in said waters. 5. I am informed, by the said master of the " Favorite," and several of the crew of tbe " Favorite," and do verily believe, that on the night of the 1st August, or early morning of the 2nd August, a.d. 1886, the said "Favorite," while in the Behring's Sea, not far from where the schooner "Onward" was seized on the said morning of the 2nd August, 1886, and while lawfully pursuing the objects of said voyage, was hailed by United States' steam-ship "Corwin," then having in tow the seized vessels "Thornton" and % Carolena." After the usual inquiries as to the name of the vessel, the Commander or officer then in charge of the said " Corwin" ordered the " Favorite" to cease sealing and leave Behring's Sea forthwith, otherwise she would be seized, or words to that effect. The master of the " Favorite," not v/ishing to risk seizure, and fearing that if he remained in the said sea his vessel and cargo would be so seized as threatened by the Commander of the" Corwin," and for no other reason or reasons whatever, at once made all sail and left the said sealing .grounds, thereby losing the remainder of the sealing season. 6. That by reason of so being forced to cease sealing and leave Behring's Sea at about the beginning of the best period of the sealing season, the "Favorite" lost at least 1,000 seal-skins, and her total catch for the season was reduced by that much. 7. That on said voyage the " Favorite " carried twenty hunters and ten canoes. The schooner "Mary Ellen," of Victoria aforesaid, on a similar voyage the same season, with fifteen hunters and five sealing-boats, not seeing or hearing of the said seizures, and remaining in the sea till or about the close of the sealing season, caught 4,256 seal-skins. The actual catch of the " Favorite " for said season was only 3,325, though she had one-third more hunters than the said " Mary Ellen," and equally as good, if not better, chances of obtaining as large a catch; and I verily believe that the sum of the actual catch of the "Favorite," together with the 1,000 herein claimed, making a total of 4,325 for tbe season of 1886, is a fair and reasonable estimate for the catch of the "Favorite" that year, had she had not been interfered with as above set out. 8. That the market price per seal-skin at Victoria at the close of the season of 1886 was 7 dollars, and the amount claimed as the value of 1,000 skins lost to the owner of the "Favorite " by reason of her so leaving the Behring's Sea is 7,000 dollars. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the " Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton, in the Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public for Ontario. Inclosure 4 in No. 90. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. 1 Sir, Government House, Ottaiva, January 5, 1888. • WITH reference to previous correspondence, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council of Canada, embodying a Report of my Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting detailed statements of the claims of the owners and agents of the " W. P. Sayward," "Grace," "Anna Beck," "Dolphin," " Alfred Adams," and " Ada," seized in theBehring's Sea during the present season for the alleged offence of illegally capturing seals. 143 The Minister, you will observe, is of opinion that the claims submitted are reasonable,, and recommends that they be presented to the United States' Government. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosnve 5 in No. 90. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 30th December, 1887. ON a Report dated the 19th December, 1887, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting detailed statements of the claims of the owners and agents of the following vessels seized in the Behring's Sea during the present season by United States' revenue vessels, for the alleged offence of illegally capturing seals:— 1. Schooner " W. P. Sayward," seized the 9th July, 1887, latitude 54° 43' north, longitude 167° 51' west, 58 miles from nearest land; 2. Steam-schooner " Grace," seized the 17th July longitude 168° 40'west, 92,miles from nearest, land; 3. Schooner " Anna Beck," seized the 2nd Julv, 1887, latitude 53° 3' north, 1887, latitude 54° 58' north, latitude 54° 38' north, longitude 167° 26' west, 66 miles from nearest land; 4. Steam-schooner "Dolphin," seized the 12th July, 188 longitude 167° 3' west, 42 miles from nearest land; 5. Schooner " Alfred Adams," seized the 6th August, 1887, latitude 54° 48' north, longitude 167° 49' west, 62 miles from nearest land ; 6. Schooner "Ada," seized the 25th August, 1887, about 15 miles northward from Ounalaska Island, which was the nearest land; The Minister represents that the circumstances connected with the seizure of these vessels do not materially differ from those attending the seizures of 1886, and for which claims for the losses sustained have already been forwarded to Her Majesty's Government, for presentation to the Government of the United States. It may, however, be maintained that the injustice of the seizures made in 1887 is emphasized by the action of the United States' Government in ordering the release of the vessels seized in 1886, and thus leading owners of the vessels for which claims are now presented to fairly assume that, under similar circumstances, no further seizures of Canadian vessels in Behring's Sea would be effected by the United States' Government. The Minister believes that the claims submitted herewith, the particulars of which, as far as possible, are attested to, are reasonable, and recommends that they be forwarded to Her Majesty's Government, for presentation to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward the claims herein mentioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the United States' Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 6 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of Britis. Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. That I have been a resident of the said city of Victoria for the past twenty-nine years, and during that time.I have been largely interested in the building, equipment, and management of steam and sailing vessels fishing business at said city for the past fourteen or fifteen years. 2. The steam-schooners "Grace" and "Dolphin," And. the schooner " W. P. Sayward," and the rebuilding and fitting with steam-power of the steam-schooners "Anna Beck" and "Thornton," all of which vessels have been seized in Behring's Sea by the United States' authorities, were" built and done for me, and under my personal direction, and were each owned and managed by me for some time after their completion, and are I have also been engaged in the sealing and 144 now managed by me for their respective owner and owners. The schooners " Carolena," "Favorite," "Alfred Adams," "Ada," and "Onward," all also seized in Behring's Sea by the United States' authorities, were each and all well known to me from personal knowledge. From my interest in the Behring's Sea sealing business, I kept myself well posted on the matter and manner of the condition and equipment of the said vessels, ana most of the facts stated in the declarations of claim in the case of each of these vessels came under my personal observation. The said vessels, excepting the "Thornton," "Onward," and "Carolena," which are at Ounalaska, are at Sitka, in the United States' Territory of Alaska. 3. To bring these vessels from Sitka to Victoria, a distance of about 900 miles, will involve a cost of at least 1,600 dollars to purchase the necessary materials and take them to Sitka, and to convey the necessary men to Sitka and pay their wages. From leaving Victoria until arrival back with any one of said vessels would take about two months, or perhaps a few days less in the summer months, and a few days more in the winter months. 4. A full hunting and sealing season begins as early as the I st January and up till the 1st March, and extends thence until the end of September. This season is divided into two parts, the coast season and the Behring's Sea season. The coast season terminates about the end of June, but vessels intending to go to Behring's Sea generally leave the coast fishing during the month of May, sealing as they go northward, and reaching Behring's Sea the end of June or beginning of July. The best period of the sealing season in Behring's Sea varies in different years according to the prevailing weather from about the 20th July to the end of September, after which date, though seals are plentiful, stress of weather compels sealing-vessels to leave the sea and go south. 5. On sealing voyages the hunters are paid in lieu of wages so much per seal skin on each skin they capture, receiving from 2 to 2^ dollars per skin. The masters are generally paid partly in wages and partly in the same manner as the hunters. The only vessel in the Behring's Sea in either of the seasons of 1886 or 1887 that made a reasonably full catch of seals was the schooner " Mary Ellen," of Victoria, which, in the season of 1886, took 4,256 seal-skins. On and for said season the " Mary Ellen" carried fifteen hunters and five boats, an average catch per boat of 851 seal-skins, the five boats being about equal to eight or nine canoes. The " Mary.Ellen " was the only vessel in Behring's Sea in either 1886 or 1887 which, so far as I know, or am able after inquiry to learn, remained the full season in said sea on and about the best sealing grounds without being disturbed by the United States' authorities. And I believe that the said steam-schooners " Grace Dolphin " and " Anna Beck," and the said schooner " W. P. Sayward," which were the best equipped vessels for sealing that had ever entered the Behring's Sea, would have, if not seized or disturbed by the United States' authorities, made an etjually large catch in said years 1886 and 1887, there being no reason why they should not do so. 6. The masters of the steam-schooner "Thornton " and schooner " Onward," and the mate of the schooner " Carolena," after their arrival at Sitka as prisoners in the latter part of August, entered into an agreement with one Clarke, a counsellor-at-law at Sitka, to defend their vessels and themselves on their pending trial at Sitka before the United States' District Court, and the charge of 500 dollars for legal expenses at Sitka in the case of each of the said vessels is to cover the claim of said Clarke. 7. The wages of the crew of each of the said seized vessels, except the " Alfred Adams " and I Onward," are based on two months' service expiring on the day of seizure in each case. In the " Adams" and " Onward" cases, the crews were paid up to the time of their arrival at Victoria. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me, at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton and Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) J. M. Baldeeson, Notary Public for Ontario. 145 Inclosure 7 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent, by power of attorney bearing date the 4th November, a.d. 1886, of Thomas H. Cooper, of the city of San Francisco, in the State of California, one of the United States of America, the managing owner of the hereinafter mentioned schooner " W. P. Sayward." 2. That the said Thomas H. Cooper is, as I am informed and do verily believe, a British subject by birth, and has never renounced his allegiance to the Sovereign of Great Britain. 3. That the said schooner | W. P. Sayward " is a British vessel, having been built at Victoria aforesaid in a.d. 1882, and duly registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid,, and was at the time of her seizure, as hereinafter set out, so registered. The said p W. P. Sayward " is 135f tons burden, by builder's measurement, and is a well and strongly built vessel. 4. That on the 16th day of May, a.d. 1887, after having duly cleared at Customs at the port of Victoria aforesaid for such purpose, the " W. P. Sayward " sailed from Victoria on and for a full hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. On said voyage George E. Ferey, of the said city of Victoria, was master; Andrew Laing, of the same place, mate ; and the crew numbered, in addition to the master and mate, twenty-two or twenty-three, with nine canoes and one boat for hunting and sealing purposes. 5. On the 2nd day of July then next following the said " W. P. Sayward " entered Behring's Sea, having then on board, as by the report of the master sent to me, 479 sealskins, all taken on the voyage from Victoria to Behring's Sea prior to the said 2nd day of July. After entering the said sea the weather was very thick, and no sealing was done by the "W. P. Sayward." 6. On the 9th day of said July, the | W. P. Sayward " then being in latitude 54° 43' north and longitude 167° 51' west, and about 58 miles from Ounalaska Island, the nearest" land, and lawfully pursuing the objects of her voyage, was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush," and taken to Illoolook Harbour, at Ounalaska Island, in the United States' Territory of Alaska. At said harbour the seal-skins on board the | W. P. Sayward " were taken out and stored on shore, and the " W. P. Sayward" was, by order of tbe authorities of the United States, sent to Sitka, in the said Territory of Alaska, in charge of an officer from said " Richard Rush," together with all her crew. 7. Upon.arrival at Sitka the " W. P. Sayward" was handed over to United States' Marshal Atkins, the master and mate of the " W. P. Sayward," the said George' E. Ferey and Andrew Laing, were taken before a Judge and bound over to appear for trial on the 22nd day of August then instant, and from day to day thereafter, on a charge of having violated the laws of the United States relating to seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. The said master and mate so appeared on the 22nd August and day by day thereafter, until the 9th day of September, when, without having been tried on said charge or any other charge whatever, they were unconditionally released. 8. That hereto annexed, marked " (A)," is a statement of the value of the said schooner | W. P. Sayward " at tbe time of her seizure by the " Richard Rush," also of the articles, and groups of articles, and the value thereof, comprising the outfit of the "W. P. Sayward " on and for said voyage, also of the amount of premiums paid for insurance of the hull, outfit, and cargo of said schooner during said voyage; also of the amount paid in wages to the crew and hunters on said voyage; also of the fares and expenses of the mate to and from Victoria for instructions, and of the master, mate, and part of the crew in returning to Victoria from Sitka; and also of the number and value of the seal-skins taken from the said schooner when seized. 9. The value placed on the schooner " W. P. Sayward " in said Exhibit (A), namely, 6,000 dollars, is a fair and reasonable valuation of the said schooner, considering her original cost, which was about 7,000 dollars, the condition of repair she was in when seized, and the value of vessels of her class at Victoria aforesaid, for such purposes as the "W. P. Sayward" was designed and used. Immediately before going on said voyage she was thoroughly repaired and refitted, and, at the time of her seizure, was in first-class order [128] U 146 and condition. Besides the outfit mentioned in Exhibit (A), there was on board the " W. P. Sayward," when seized, a considerable quantity of extra gear, tackling, and ship stores. The insurance value of the " W. P. Sayward," for the year 1887, was 6,000 dollars, and on and during said voyage she was insured in the sum of J,000L on her hull, and in 2,000Z. on her outfit and cargo. 10. The value placed on the various articles and groups of articles comprising the outfit of the said schooner, as given in Exhibit (A), is the market price for each of said articles at Victoria aforesaid at the time of their purchase for the use and purposes of said voyage. The price charged in Exhibit (A) for the seal-skins on board the " W. P. Sayward " when seized, namely, 5 dol. 50 c. per skin, is the market price per skin current at Victoria aforesaid on or about the close of the sealing season of 1887, when the catch of the £1 W. P. Sayward," had not such seizure taken place, would have been placed on the said market. 11. That hereto annexed, marked "(C)," is a statement of the legal and personal expenses incurred at Sitka and elsewhere by reason of the seizure of the "W. P. Sayward," the arrest and detention of her master and mate, and the claims arising therefrom. 12. That hereto annexed, marked " (D)," is an estimate of the loss and damage resulting to the owner thereof by reason of the seizure and detention of the schooner " W. P. Sayward " during the season of 1887, and the probable loss from the same cause for the season of 1888. The estimated catch of seals by the " W. P. Sayward " for the season of 1887 is based upon an average catch of 350 seals per boat and canoe for a full season, and I verily believe, had the above seizure not taken place, that, under ordinary circumstances, the total catch of the " W. P. Sayward " for said full season would have been at least the said number of 3,500 seals. 13. That after the close of the sealing season, and during the months of October, November, and December, a.d. 1887, and January 1888, had the " W. P. Sayward " been in her owner's possession she would have been engaged in the coasting and general freighting trade in and about the coasts of British Columbia, and the said claim of 300 dollars per month for each of said months is a fair and reasonable estimate of the earnings of the " W. P. Sayward " for and during said months, after deducting therefrom the cost of wages and running expenses. 14. In order to put the " W. P. Sayward "in order and condition to engage in hunting and fishing the full season of 1888, it is necessary that she should be in her owner's possession at Victoria aforesaid on or before the 1st day of February, a.d. 1888. If not then at Victoria it will be impossible to repair and refit her in time to start' out on a full season voyage which begins about the 1st March. As during the summer months there would be little for a vessel like the " W. P. Sayward " to do in the coasting and local freighting trade, if she were not got away on a fishing and hunting voyage the season would be practically lost. The estimated profit on a full season of hunting and fishing by the "W. P. Sayward "in 1888, namely, 6,G00 dollars, is a fair and reasonable catch estimate, based on a catch of 3,500 seal-skins, and, deducting from the gross value thereof, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin, the cost of outfit and wages based on the " W. P. Sayward's" voyage of 1887. 15. That hereto annexed, marked " (E)," is a statement of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which it is so claimed. On the 1st October, a.d. 1887, on or about which date the catch of the " W. P. Sayward " for 1887 would have been, in the ordinary course of events, realized on, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes at the said city of Victoria was, has since continued to be, and now is, 7 per cent, per annum. 16. That hereto annexed, marked "(F)," is a statement of the articles, and groups of articles, and the value thereof, comprised in the outfit of the " W. P. Sayward " on said voyage as given in Exhibit (A), which would have been wholly or almost wholly consumed in the course and prosecution of a full season's hunting and fishing voyage, such as contemplated by the "W. P. Sayward" in 1887. And I, James DouglasWarren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the | Act respecting Extra-judicial oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton and Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. ^reg7CT»ft^^raw^mwmM^^ 147 Exhibit (A). Value of the schooner " W. P. Sayward " at the time of her seizure bv United Slates' steam-ship " Richard Rush " on the 9th July, a'.d. 1887 Value of " W. P. Sayward's" outfit ori said voyage— Groceries .. .. .. .. .. .. Ammunition .. .. .. .. .. .. Dry goods .. .. .. .. .. .. Two iron tanks .. .. .. .. .. Water-casks .. .. .. .. ... Ship chandlery Four No. 10 shot guns .. .. .. Two rifles .. .. ,. .. .. .. Gun implements and tools .. .. ., .. One sealing-boat (returned) .. .. .. .. Nine canoes and outfits .. ., .. 8 tons salt .. .. .. 5 tons coal .. .. .. Cooking range and utensils .. .. .. .. Insurance— Premium on 1,000/. on hull, 84/. 6s. 8d. Premium on 2,000/. on cargo, 105/. 13s. 4d. Wages paid, sailors and hunters for voyage up to time of seizure .. Passage money of mate to Victoria for counsel and instructions and return s .. .. .. .. .. .. Fares of master and mate on return to Victoria, and personal expenses .. .. Fares of seventeen men (crew) from Fort Simpson to Victoria 47 9 seals on board " W. P. Sayward" when seized, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. .. .. Dol. c. (Signed) Total, Exhibit (A) .. (Signed) D. O'Connok, Notary Public. Dol. 6,000 00 856 67 202 76 95 75 50 00 25 00 101 40 160 00 45 00 9 00 513 00 120 00 35 00 76 00 2,288 58 410 70 514 59 925 29 1,437 75 , . 100 00 150 00 255 00 505 00 2,634 50 13,791 12 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (G). Dol. c Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with the seizure of the "W. P. Sayward" .. .. .. .. .. 100 00 Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and about the claims arising from said seizure .. .. .. .. .. 750 00 Personal expenses of the owner in connection with said seizure and claims .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 250 00 (Signed) Total, Exhibit (C) .. .. (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. 1,100 oo J. D. WARREN. Exhihit (D).—Damages arising from the Seizure and Detention of the "W. P. Sayward," during tbe Season of 1887, based upon her reasonable and probable Catch of Seals for that Season. Dol. c. Estimated catch of seal-skins .. .. .. .. .. 3,500 Less on board at seizure .. .. .. .. .. 479 Balance, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. ., 3,021 = 16,615 50 Loss to owners of " W. P. Sayward " by reason of her detention after the close of the sealing season of 1887, namely, for the months of October, November, and December, a.t». 1887, and January, a.d. 1888, when the " W. P. Sayward," if in owner's possession, would have been engaged in coasting trade. Four months, at 800 dollars per month .. .. If owner not put in possession of " W. P. Sayward" on or before the 1st February, 1888, so that she may be put in order and condition to engage in fishing and hunting voyage for season of 1888, reasonable and probable profit for the season of 1888 .. .. .. .. .. 1,200 00 6,000 00 [128] U 2 148 Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the Principal Sams on which Interest is claimed at 7 per cent, per annum, and the Time for which it is so claimed. Dol. c. Value of the estimated catch of the " W. P. Sayward " for season of 1887, from the 1st day of October, a.d. 1887, when said catch would have been realized on, viz., 3,500 skins, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. .. .. 19,250 00 Actual outlay for legal and other expenses on account of said seizure prior to the 1st October, 1887 .. .. .. .. .. .. 605 10 Total principal on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum from the 1st October, 1887, is claimed .. .. .. .. .. (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connoe., Notary Public. 19,855 10 D. WARREN. Exhibit (F).—Value of estimated Consumption of Articles of "W. P. Sayward's" Outfit on a full Voyage. Groceries .. Ammunition Dry goods .. Ship chandlery Salt Coal Wages Insurance premiums Dol. c. 856 67 202 76 95 75 101 40 120 00 35 00 1,437 75 925 29 Total consumption (Signed) 3,774 62 J. D. WARREN. (Signed) D. O'Connob, Notary Public. Memo. If the full claim for the season of 1887, as set out in Exhibit (D), be allowed, then the amount of this exhibit, 3,774 dol. 62 c, will properly appear as a credit, and be deducted from the total of Exhibit (A), of which it forms a part. Inclosure 8 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent of Thomas H. Cooper, of the city of San Francisco, in the State of California, one of the United States of America, the owner of the hereinafter-mentioned steam-schooner "Grace," by power of attorney bearing date the 4th day of February, a.d. 1886. 2. That the said Thomas H. Cooper is, I am informed and do verily believe, a British subject by birth, and never having renounced his allegiance to the Sovereign of Great Britain. 3. That the said steam-schooner " Grace " is a British vessel built at Victoria aforesaid, in a.d. 1881, and duly registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid. By builder's measurement the " Grace " is about 182 tons burden. She is substantially and strongly built, copper fastened throughout, and in a.d. 1885 her bottom and sides to about half- load-line were coppered. Her steam power consists of one large boiler, compound engines, and all necessary iittings, including inside surface condenser, steam fire pumps and hose, and also had on board a double steam cargo winch. 4. The said | Grace " was duly licensed as a passenger boat, and had all the appliances and conveniences required by Canadian law for such vessels. 5. That as such agent as aforesaid, I am the sole manager of the said steam- schooner " Grace " for the said Thomas H. Cooper. 149 6. That on or about the 23rd day of April, a.d. 1887, having previously duly cleared therefor at the port of Victoria aforesaid, the said steam-schooner " Grace" sailed from Victoria on and for a full season hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. On said voyage the crew of the " Grace " consisted of William Petit, of Victoria aforesaid, master, a mate, and twenty-nine sailors and hunters. 7. That on the 6th or 7th day of July following the " Grace" entered the Behring's Sea along the 172nd west meridian, through the Amoughta Pass, commonly called the " 172nd Pass,'' having then on board 458 seals taken while on the voyage from Victoria aforesaid to the said pass. 8. That on the 12th day of said July, a.d. 1887, the " Grace " began sealing in said Behring's Sea, and from then till she was seized as hereinafter set out caught 323 seals. On the 17th day of the said month of July the United States' steam-ship "Richard Rush" seized the said steam-schooner " Grace" for alleged violation of the laws of the United States of America respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. At the time of said seizure the " Grace" was in north latitude 55° 3' and west longitude 168° 40', then being about 92 miles from Ounalaska Island, the nearest land, and, as I verily believe, lawfully pursuing the objects of said voyage. 9. The " Grace " after being seized was taken to Ounalaska, in the Territory of Alaska, where by order of the United States' authorities thereat, all the seal-skins on board, except as hereinafter stated, were taken out and stored at Ounalaska, and all the firearms and ammunition taken on board the said "Richard Rush." On removing the seal-skins twelve were missing. Five were afterwards discovered on board the " Grace " and not removed, the remaining seven were not, so far as I know, ever found. 10. After removal from the "Grace" of the said seal-skins as stated in the preceding paragraph 8, a United States' officer was placed on board the " Grace," and she was, in charge of said officer, taken to Sitka, in the Territory of Alaska, together with all the crew and hunters. On arrival at Sitka on the 1st August United States' Marshal Atkins took charge of the " Grace." The master, the said William Petit, was bound over to appear for trial on the 22nd day of August then instant, on a charge then preferred against him of having violated the laws of the United States respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. The said master so appeared for trial on the 22nd instant, and thereafter day by day until the 9th day of September next following, when, without having been brought to . trial on such a charge or any other charge whatever, he was unconditionally released. 11. That hereto annexed, marked | (A)," is a statement of the value of said steam- schooner " Grace " at the time of her seizure, and of the outfit then on board, also of the premiums paid for insurance on the hull, outfit, and cargo of the | Grace " for and during said voyage ; also of the amount of wages paid tbe crew and hunters on and for said voyage up to time of seizure ; also of the expenses and fares of the master and five men at and from Sitka to Victoria aforesaid, and also of the number of the seal-skins on board at the time of seizure, and the value thereof. 12. That the value placed upon the said steam-schooner | Grace " at the time of her seizure, namely, 12,000 dollars, is based upon the original cost of the said vessel, the state of repair she was then in, and the general market value of the vessels of the same class at the said port of Victoria, and for the same purpose for which she was designed. The first cost of the " Grace " was between 16,000 and 17,000 dollars. At the time of her seizure she was 6 years old, and in 1885 had been thoroughly repaired, coppered as aforesaid, and generally put in first-class order and condition. On her departure on said voyage she was in good order and condition, and had on said voyage up to the time of seizure sustained no damage beyond ordinary wear and tear. Her insurance value for said year 1887 was placed at 12,500 dollars, and she was, while on said voyage, insured for the sum of 2,000Z., and the said value of 12,000 dollars at the time of her seizure is a reasonable and fair value for the said steam-schooner " Grace." 13. That the value in Exhibit (A) placed on the articles, and groups of articles, comprising the outfit of the said " Grace " is the cost price of the said articles at the port of Victoria at the time of their purchase for the purposes of said voyage. In addition to the outfit named in Exhibit (A), there was on board the " Grace " at the time of her seizure a considerable quantity of general ship stores. 14. The price per" seal-skin charged in Exhibit (A), namely, 5 dol. 50 c. per skin for the seal-skins on board the " Grace " when seized and taken out at Ounalaska was the market price at Victoria at the close of the sealing season of 1887, when the catch of the | Grace " for that season, in the ordinary course of events, would have been placed on the market. 15. That hereto annexed, marked " (C)," is a statement of the legal expenses incurred at Sitka and elsewhere by reason of the seizure of the "Grace" and the arrest of the IUMtf«if« 150 ill: 111 captain, and the claims arising therefrom, and also of the personal expenses connected therewith. 16. That hereto annexed, marked " (D)," is a statement of the amounts claimed by the owner of the steam-schooner "Grace" by reason of her seizure and detention during the season of 1887, and of the loss arising from the detention of the said " Grace " after the close of said season. 17. The estimated catch by the | Grace" for the season of 1887, namely, 4,200 sealskins, is based upon a reasonable and probable catch per boat or canoe for that season. Exeprience in sealing has proved that the greater number of boats or canoes, or both, carried by any one sealing-vessel, the smaller the average per canoe or boat, and it is in view of this that the average per canoe for the " Grace " is put at 300 per canoe, while the average for the steam-schooner " Anna Beck " for the same season is placed at 350, the latter carrying eight canoes and one boat, while the former carried twelve canoes and two boats. The said average catch of 300 seal-skins per canoe and boat for the | Grace " is a fair average catch, and I verily believe that, had the " Grace " not been seized as aforesaid, her catch for the season of 1887 would have exceeded the said number of 4,200 seal-skins. 18. That during the months of October, November, and December, a.d. 1887, and January, a.d. 1888, had the "Grace" been in possession of her owner, she would have been engaged in the coasting trade between the various ports of British Columbia. The estimated loss per month of 500 dollars for each of said months is a fair and reasonable estimate of the earnings of the said steam-schooner " Grace" for the said months of October, November, December, and January, after deducting the cost of wages and ordinary running expenses, and I verily believe that the " Grace " would have earned the said sum per month had she been in her owner's possession. 19. That in order to engage in the hunting and fishing of next year, namely, A.D. 1888, and in view of the fact that the " Grace " will require the usual overhauling and fitting out before being sent on so long a voyage, the latest date at which it will be possible to begin necessary repairs and refitting, and have them completed in order to leave at or about the usual date on said hunting and fishing voyage, will be on or about the 1st day of February, a.d. 1888. If the "Grace "be not delivered to the owners at Victoria on or before that date, it will be too late to repair and refit her for a full season hunting and fishing voyage, which begins on or about the 1st March of each year. During the summer months, for a vessel of the class and equipment of the | Grace," there is very little to do in and about the coasting trade, and the season in the event of the " Grace " not being in the possession of her owner on or before the 1st February, A.D. 1888, would be practically lost to her owner. The claim for loss if detained beyond the 1st February aforesaid is a fair and reasonable estimate of the loss which will in such cases be sustained by the owner of the " Grace." 20. That hereto annexed, marked " (E)," is an estimate of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which it is so claimed. On the 1st day of October, a.d. 1887, when the catch of the | Grace" would have been, in the ordinary course of events, realized on, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes at the said city of Victoria was, has since continued to be, and now is, 7 per cent, per annum. 21. That hereto annexed, marked "(F)," is a statement of the articles, and groups of articles, and the value thereof, from Exhibit (A), which would have been wholly, or almost wholly, consumed in the course and prosecution of the said voyage, had not the " Grace " been seized and detained as aforesaid. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue oi the " Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths."" (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton, in the Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, A.D. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public for Ontario. 151 Exhibit (A). Value of the steam-schooner " Grace " at the time of her seizure .. Outfit— Groceries ,. .. .. .. .. .. Ammunition .. .. .. ,, Dry goods .. .. .. .. .. ., Three iron water-tanks Water-casks.. .. .. .. .. .. Ship chandlery .. .. .. .. Twelve No. 10 shot guns Three rifles One small cannon on carriage for signalling Gun implements and tools Two sealing boats and outfits Twelve canoes and outfits 8£ tons of salt 33 tons of coal Cooking range and utensils .. .. .. Insurance— Premium on 2,000/. insurance on hull .. .. „ „ „ outfit nnd cargo Wages paid crew and hunters on voyage up, to time of seisure I .. Fares from Sitka to Victoria of master and five of the crew, and master's expenses at Sitka .. .. .. 781 seal-skins on board the " Grace" when seized, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin Total, Exhibit (A) „ .. ! .. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. c. Dol. 'O. 12,000 00 948 13 166 .63 276 17 66 00 25 00 161 18 480 00 77 50 50 00 10 50 249 57 684 00 127 50 231 00 100 00 3,653 18 821 40 514 59 1,335 2,164 99 25 200 00 4,295 50 23,648 92 J. D. WARREN (Signed) Exhibit (C). Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with the seizure of the " Grace " and arrest of master .. ,. Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and about the seizure of th " Grace," and other claims arising thereunder .. .. Personal expenses in the same connection Total .. .. .. (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. A Dol. c. 100 00 e . 750 00 • 250 00 • 1,100 00 j. D. WARREN Exhibit (D).—Estimated Loss and Damage to the Owner of the " Grace," by reason of her Seizure and Detention, during a.d. 1887. Dol. c. Reasonable and probable catch of seals for the season of 1887 .. 4,200 Less number on board when seized, and charged in Exhibit (A) . 781 Balance at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin Reasonable earnings of " Grace" during months of October, November, and December 1887, and January 1888,» had she been in owner's possession, viz., four months at 500 dollars each .. .. .. Estimated loss for sealing season of 1888, if "Grace" not in possession of owner on or before 1st February, 1888 .. Total .. (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. 3,419 = 18,804 50 2,000 00 7,000 00 27,804 50 J. D. WARREN, . BHIB BSffl 162 Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the principal sums on which Interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the Time for which such Interest is so claimed. Value of the "Grace's" estimated catch of seals for 1887, from the 1st October, a.d. 1887, on or before which date the said catch would have been realized on, viz., 4,200 skins at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin Cash expended for legal and other expenses on account of such seizure up to said date ... .. .. .. .. •. Total principal on which interest is claimed at 7 per cent, per annum from 1st October to date of payment .. (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. 23,100 oo 300 oo 23,400 00 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (F).—Value of the Articles of the "Grace's" Outfit which would have been wholly, or almost wholly consumed, on a full hunting and fishing voyage. Groceries .. Ammunition Dry goods ' .. Ship chandlery .. Salt Coal Wages.. Insurance premiums Total value consumed .. .. .. .. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. c. 948 13 166 63 276 17 161 18 127 50 231 00 2,164 25 1,335 99 5,410 85 J. D. WARREN. (Signed) Memo. If the full claim for the season of 1887, as set out in Exhibit (D) be allowed, then the amount of this Exhibit, 5,410 dol. 85 c, will properly appear as a credit, and be deducted from the total of Exhibit (A) of which it forms a part. Inclosure 9 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent of Thomas H. Cooper, of the city of San Francisco, in the State of California, one of the United States of America, engineer, by power of attorney bearing date the 4th day of November, A.n. 1886, the owner of the hereinafter-mentioned steam-schooner " Anna Beck." 2. That the said Thomas H. Cooper is, as I am informed and verily believe, a British subject by birth, and has never renounced his allegiance to the Sovereign of Great Britain. 3. That the said steam-schooner "Anna Beck" is a British vessel since a.b. 1872, when she was transferred by purchase from the Registry of the port of San Francisco aforesaid to that of Victoria aforesaid, and has since remained on the Registry of the port of Victoria. In 1883 the "Anna Beck" was rebuilt and raised, and in the winter of 1880-81 she was fitted up with steam-propellor, and all the machinery and appliances necessary for such a purpose. The cost of said steam-power and rebuilding was over 8,000 dollars. 4. That as agent, as aforesaid, of the said Thomas H. Cooper, I am the sole manager of the said steam-schooner "Anna Beck." 5. That on the 21st March, a.d. 1887, the said "Anna Beck" sailed from Victoria, having previously cleared for that purpose, on a full season's hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. On or about the 25th day of May then next following the "Anna Beck" sailed from the west coast of Vancouver Island for Behring's Sea. On and for said voyage to Behring's Sea the crew of "Anna Beck" consisted of 158 Louis Olsen, of the said city of Victoria, master; Michael Keefe, of the same place, mate ; and twenty-one sailors and hunters, with one sealing-boat and eight canoes, and a complete outfit for a full voyage of hunting and fishing in Behring's Sea. 6. That on or about the 28th day of June, a.d. 1887, the "Anna Beck " entered the Behring's Sea, and on the 2nd day of July, a.d. 1887, while in said sea, in latitude 54° 58' north and longitude 167° 26' west, then being about 66 miles from the nearest land, and lawfully engaged in the objects of said voyage, the "Anna Beck" was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush," for alleged violation of the laws of the United States respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. 7. That at the time of said seizure the " Anna Beck " had on board 334 seal-skins, most of which had been taken by the " Anna Beck " on her voyage up to the time of entering said sea, and not afterwards. After seizure, the "Anna Beck" was, by the authority of the Commander of the " Richard Rush," taken to Illoolook Harbour, at Ounalaska Island, in the United States' Territory of Alaska, where the said seal-skins were taken out and stored on shore, and the arms and ammunition transferred to the said I Richard Rush," either at sea or in said harbour. The master, mate, and crevv of tbe "Anna Beck" were sent to Sitka, in said Territory of Alaska, on the American schooner "Challenge." On their arrival at Sitka aforesaid the master and mate of the "Anna Beck " were taken before a Judge, and bound over to appear before said Judge on the 22nd August then instant, for trial, on a charge of having violated the laws of the United States respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. The master and mate so appeared for trial on the 22nd day of August, a.d. 1887, and thereafter from day to day until the 9th day of September then next following, when, without having been brought to trial on said charge, or on any other charge whatever, they were unconditionally released. 8. That hereto annexed, marked " (A)," is a statement showing the value of the said steam-schooner "Anna Beck" at the time of her seizure as above set out, excepting only what had been consumed in the ordinary course and prosecution of the said voyage ; also of the outfit, and value thereof, of the " Anna Beck " on said voyage; also of the amounts paid for insurance premiums on the hull, outfit, and cargo of the "Anna Beck" on and during said voyage; also of the amount of wages paid to the crew and hunters for said voyage up to the time of said seizure; also of the fares and expenses of the master and mate from. Sitka to Victoria, and of sixteen of the crew of the " Anna Beck" from Fort Simpson to Victoria; and also of the number and value of the seal-skins taken from the said " Anna Bech " after such seizure at Ounalaska Island. 9. The value placed on the said steam-schooner "Anna Beck," namely, 8,000 dollars, is based upon her cost, the order and condition in which she was when seized, and the value of similar vessels at Victoria aforesaid. As stated in the preceding paragraph 3 of this declaration, the 1 Anna Beck " was fitted with steam propelling power in a.d. 1880-81, and in a.d. 1883 was rebuilt and raised at a total cost of over 8,000 dollars. At the time of her seizure she was in first-class order and condition, having been thoroughly overhauled and refitted for said voyage, and the value claimed for her, namely, 8,000 dollars, is a fair and reasonable value for her at the time of her said seizure. 10. The prices charged in Exhibit (A) for the articles, and groups of articles, comprising the outfit of the "Anna Beck" on said voyage are the market pricss at Victoria aforesaid at the time of their purchase for the use and purposes of said'voyage, and the price per skin charged for the seal-skins taken from the " Anna Beck " when seized is the market price per skin current at Victoria aforesaid at the close of the season of 1887, when, in the ordinary course of events, the catch of the " Anna Beck" would have been placed on said market. 11. That hereto annexed, marked "(C)," is a statement of the legaland personal expenses at Sitka and elsewhere arising out of the seizure and detention of the " Anna Beck," the arrest of her master and mate, and the claims arising therefrom. 12. That hereto annexed, marked | (D)," is a statement of the estimated loss and damage to the owner of the said " Anna Beck," by reason of her seizure and detention as aforesaid for the years a.d. 1887 and a.d. 1888. The estimated catch of seals for the season of 1887, namely, 3,1.50, is calculated upon an average catch per boat and per canoe of 350 seals, which is a fair and reasonable estimate of the probable catch per boat and per canoe for the boat and each of the canoes of the said " Anna Beck " during the season of 1887. 13. After the close of the sealing season of 1-887, and during the following months of October, November, and December, a.d. 1887, and January, a.d. 1888, had the said steam-schooner " Anna Beck" been in possession of her said owner, she would have been engaged in the general coasting and freighting trade in and about the coasts of British Columbia aforesaid, and the reasonable and orobable earnings of the "Anna Beck" for [128] X MBs 154 said months of October, November, December, and January, after deducting from the gross amount thereof the cost of wages and running expenses, would be at least 500 dollars per month for each of the said months. 14. In order that the "Anna Beck " may be repaired and refitted in time to engage in a full season's hunting and fishing voyage for a.d. 1888, it is necessary that she should be in her owner's possession at Victoria aforesaid on or about the 1st day of February, a.d. 1888. If not at that date at Victoria and in possession of her owner, it will be impossible to put her in fit and proper condition to start out on said voyage at or about the usual time, which is on or about the 1st March in each year. During the summer months there is little for a vessel of the class and equipment of the " Anna Beck " to do in and about the general coasting trade, and if not engaged in hunting and fishing as aforesaid the season would be practically lost. The claim of 6,000 dollars as probable loss and damage to the owner of the " Anna Beck" if she is detained after the 1st February, a.d. 1888, is a fair and reasonable estimate of his said loss by reason of such detention, for the season of 1888. 15. That hereto annexed, marked " (E)," is a statement of the principal sums on which interest is claimed, the rate thereof, and the time from and to which it is so claimed. At the time when the catch of the " Anna Beck " for 1887 would have been realized, on or about the 1st October, 1887, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes at Victoria aforesaid was, has since continued to be, and now p, 7 per cent, per annum. 16. That hereto annexed, marked "(F)," is a statement of the articles of the outfit of the said " Anna Beck," and the value thereof, as given in Exhibit (A), which would have been wholly or almost wholly consumed during the course and prosecution of a full hunting and fishing voyage in the Behring's Sea. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the " Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton and Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public for Ontario. Exhibit (A). Value of steam-schooner " Anna Beck" at time of seizur United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush" on 2nd a.d. 1887 .. Value of " Anna Beck's " outfit— Groceries .. .. .. Ammunition Dry good's Four iron tanks Casks .. .. Ship chandlery .. Four No. 10 shot guns .. .. Two rifles .. .. .. .. .. Gun implements and tools .. .. .. One sealing-boat and outfit .. .. .. Eight canoes and outfit .. .. .. 8 tons salt .. .. .. .. 25 tons coal.. .. Cooking range and utensils Insurance— Premium on 1,400/. on hull (118/. 1*. 4d.) „ 2,000/. on outfit (105/. 13*. 4d.) Wages paid crew and hunters up to time of seizure .. Passage and expenses of captain and mate from Sitka, and sixteen of the crew of the "Anna Beck" from Fort Simpson to Victoria .. .. .. .. .. ..{ 334 seal-skins on board the " Anna Beck " at time of seizure, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. .. .. .. Total, Exhibit (A) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol Dol. c. •e by July, h 8,000 00 876 42 242 60 , 5 95 76 82 00 ., 10 00 • 240 06 160 00 # # 45 oo 4 # 9 00 . # 140 50 , # 456 00 100 00 j. 175 00 .. 75 00 574 98 514 59 2,727 34 1,089 57 1,111 50 460 54 1,837 00 15,225 95 J. D. WARREN. OKKtBy!isv^'«f^iii<aenfrfiXiWW*tahHitf^ggxgl 155 Exhibit (C). Legal expenses'at Sitka in connection with the seizure of the "Anna Beck". Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and j\bout the claims arising from said seizure ,. .. .. .. .. .. Personal expenses of the owner in connection with said seizure and claims .. Total (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. DoL c. 100 00 750 00 250 00 .. 1,100 00 J. D. WARREN. 'Exhibit (D).—Damages arising from the Seizure and Detention of the "Anna Beck" during the season 1887, based upon her reasonable and probable Catch of Seals for that season. Dol. c. Estimated catch ,. .. .. ., .. 3,150 Less skins on board when seized ., .. .. .. 334 Balance at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. .. Loss to owner of " Anna Beck " by reason of her detention after the close of thg.seftljng season of 1887, namely, for the months of October, November, and December, a. d. 18S7, and January 1888, during which time the "Anna Beck," if in owner's possession, would have been engaged in coasting trade : four months at 500 dollars If owner not put in possession of "Anna Beck" on or before 1st February, a. p. 1888, so that she may be put in order and condition to engage in fishing and hunting voyage for 1888, reasonable and probable profit for the season of 1888 (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. 2,816 = 15,488 00 2,000 00 6,000 00 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the Principal Sums on which Interest, at 7 per cent, per annum, is claimed, and the Time for which said Interest is so claimed. Value of "Anna Beck's" estimated catch of seals for 1887, about which date said catch would have been realized on, namely, 3,150 seal-skins at 5 dol. 50 c. Outlay for legal and other expenses prior to 1st October, 1887 .. Total principal on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed from 1st October, 1887, to date of payment .. Dol. 17,325 00 560 54 (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. 17,885 54 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (F).—Articles of the "Anna Beck's " Outfit, and Value thereof, as found in Exhibit (A), which would have been wholly, or almost wholly, consumed on said Voyage had it not been broken up. Dol. c. Groceries .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 876 42 Ammunition .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 242 60 Dry goods .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 95 76 Ship chandlery .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 240 06 8 tons salt .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 120 00 25 tons coal .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 175 00 Insurance .. .. .. .. .. .. .. 1,089 57 Wages.. .. .. .. ., .. .. .. 1,111 50 Total value consumed (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. 3,950 91 .). D. WARREN. Memo. If the full claim for the sealing season of 1887, as set out in Exhibit (D), be allowed, then the amount of this Exhibit, 3,950 dol. 91 c, will properly appear as a credit, and be deducted from the total of Exhibit (A), of which it forms part. [12$) X 2 UU1UOU 156 Inclosure 10 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. 1 JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent of Thomas H. Cooper, of the city of San Francisco, in the State of California, one of the United States of America, the owner of the hereinafter-mentioned steam-schooner *' Dolphin," by power of attorney bearing date the 4th day of November, a.d. 1886. 2. That the said Thomas H. Cooper is, as I am informed and do verily believe, a British subject by birth, and never having renounced his allegiance to the Sovereign of Great Britain. 3. That the said steam-schooner "Dolphin" is a British vessel, built at Victoria aforesaid in a.d. 1882, and duly registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid. By builder's measurement the "Dolphin" is 174 tons burden. She was substantially built, coppered to above light water-fine, and copper-fastened when built, and had not up to the time of her seizure hereinafter set out sustained any damage or strain beyond ordinary wear and tear. Her steam-power consists of one large steel boiler, put in during the winter of 1884-85, compound engines and all the necessary fittings, including inside surface condenser, and also steam fire-pumps and hose, and a double steam cargo winch. 4. The said steam-schooner " Dolphin " was duly licensed as a passenger-boat, and had all the appliances and conveniences required by Canadian laws for such vessels. 5. That as such agent as aforesaid, I am the sole manager of the steam-schooner " Dolphin " for the said Thomas H. Cooper. 6. That on the 16th day of May, a.d. 1887, having previously cleared at the port of Victoria for that purpose, the said "Dolphin" sailed from Victoria on and for a full season's hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and on and for said voyage the crew of the " Dolphin " consisted of myself as master, John Reilly mate, and crew of thirty-one sailors and hunters. 7. That on the 6th day of July, a.d. 1887, the " Dolphin " entered the said Behring's Sea through the Amoughta Pass, commonly called the " 172nd Pass," having then on board 590 seals, taken while on the voyage up through the North Pacific Ocean from Victoria aforesaid to Amoughta Pass aforesaid. 8. On the 9th day of said month of July the " Dolphin | began catching seals in Behring's Sea, then being in north latitude 54° 18', and west longitude 168° 40', and from said 9th day of July until the afternoon of the 12th day of said month of July the " Dolphin " caught twenty-eight seals in said Behring's Sea. 2. That on the afternoon of the 12th day of July, a.d. 1887, the United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush" seized the said steam-schooner " Dolphin" while lawfully pursuing the objects of said voyage, and then being in north latitude 54° 38', and west longitude 167° 3', and about 42 miles from Ounalaska Island, the nearest land, for an alleged violation of the laws of the United States respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. That when said seizure was made the " Dolphin " was lawfully pursuing the objects of said voyage. When the Commander of the said " Richard Rush " made the said seizure he told me that his instructions were to seize everything he found in the sea, or words to that effect. 10. After seizure all the firearms and ammunition on board the "Dolphin" were taken on board the said " Richard Rush," a Lieutenant from the latter placed on board the " Dolphin," under whose command the " Dolphin " was taken to the Illoolook Harbour at Ounalaska Island, in the United States' Territory of Alaska. After arrival there the 618 seal-skins on board the " Dolphin" were, by order of the United States' authorities thereat, taken out and stored. About 2,600 lbs. of salt were also taken out, for resalting the seal-skins. On the 20th day of said July the " Dolphin " sailed from Illoolook Harbour on Ounalaska Island for Sitka, in the said Territory of Alaska, where she arrived on the 31st day of said month of July. 11. On arrival at Sitka the "Dolphin" was taken charge of by United States' Marshal Atkins, of the said Territory of Alaska. As master of the " Dolphin " I, with the mate, the said John Eeilly, were, on the 16th' day of August then next following, taken , before a Judge and bound over to appear for trial on the 22nd day of August, a.d. 1887, on a charge then read over to us of having violated tbe law of the United States of 15; America respecting seal-fishing in the waters of Alaska. We so appeared on the 22nd day of August for trial, and from day to day thereafter, for our trial on said charge. We so appeared thereafter for trial day after day until the 9th day of September following, when, without any trial on said charge or any other charge whatever, we were unconditionally released. From our arrival at Sitka on the 31st July until the 16th day of August following, when we were taken before the Judge, no effort was made to restrain us or in any way deprive us of liberty. The crew of the "Dolphin" lived on board her all the time of their stay at Sitka, and when leaving to return to Victoria by the United States' steam-ship "Richard Rush" look from the "Dolphin" sufficient provisions and supplies for the trip. 12. That hereto annexed, marked " (A)," is a statement of the value of the steam- schooner " Dolphin " at the time of her said seizure; also of the articles, and groups of articles, comprising her outfit on and for said voyage, all of which, excepting only what had been consumed in tbe prosecution of the voyage, were on board at seizure, as well as considerable extra supplies and stores not mentionedin Exhibit (A); also of the amount of premiums paid for insurance on the hull, cargo, and outfit of the "Dolphin" for and during said voyage; also of the amount of wages paid to the crew and hunters of the p Dolphin " on said voyage up to the time of her seizure, and of the expenses of the master and mate in returning to Victoria from Sitka; and also of the number and value of the seal-skins taken from the " Dolphin " when seized. 13. The value placed on the said steam-schooner " Dolphin" in Exhibit (A), namely, 12,000 dollars, is based upon her original cost, the condition which she was in when seized, and the value of vessels of her class and equipment at Victoria aforesaid. The first cost of the " Dolphin " was over 16,000 dollars. At the time of her seizure she was in first-class order and condition, having been specially repaired and refitted for the voyage she then was on. Her insurance value for 1887 was 12,500 dollars, and she was insured on and during said voyage for 2,000Z. The said value, namely, 12,000 dollars, is a fair and reasonable value for the " Dolphin " when seized. 14. The prices charged for the articles, and groups of articles, in Exhibit (A), comprising the outfit of the | Dolphin," are the actual cost prices of the said articles, and groups of articles, at the time of their purchase at Victoria for the purposes of said voyage. The price per skin charged in Exhibit (A) for the seal-skins on board the " Dolphin " when seized, namely, 5 dol. 50 c. per skin, was the market price at Victoria aforesaid at tbe close of the sealing season of 1887, and at which time the said seal-skins would have, had not such seizure taken place, been put upon the Victoria market. 15. That hereto annexed, marked " (C)," is a statement of the legal expenses incurred at Sitka and elsewhere, and also of personal expenses arising out of the seizure of the | Dolphin," the arrest of the master and mate, and the claims relating thereto. 16. That Exhibit (D), hereto annexed, is a statement of the estimated loss and damage to the owner of the " Dolphin" by reason of her seizure and detention during a.d. 1887. The loss for 1887 is based upon a catch of 4,500 seals at the current price per seal-skin at Victoria at the close of the season of 1887. The "Dolphin," on her voyage, carried thirteen canoes and two sealing-boats, and a crew of thirty-one sailors and hunters. The estimated catch of 4,500 seals by the "Dolphin" for said season is calculated on an average catch of 300 seals per boat and canoe for a full season; and I verily believe that said average catch per boat and per canoe for said season is a fair and reasonable estimate for a full season's work. During the time the "Dolphin" was in Behring's Sea, before capture, the weather was very unfavourable for seal-hunting, being both foggy and windy, and the catch for that period is no standard by which to judge of the ordinary and average catch of the season. There are frequently, aU through the season, days at a time when no seals at all are taken, and, on the contrary, I have known a single boat to take from thirty to fifty seals per day in fine weather. 17. After the close of the sealing season, and during the succeeding months of October, November, December, and January, had the "Dolphin" been in her owner's possession, she would have been engaged in the coasting trade between the various ports and freighting places on the coasts of British Columbia. During said months the fair and reasonable earnings of the " Dolphin," after deducting from the gross amount thereof the cost of wages and running expenses, would be at least 500 dollars per month. 18. The estimated loss for the season of 1888 is based upon the said average catch of 4,500 seal-skins at the rate of 5^ dollars per skin, after deducting therefrom the cost of outfit, wages, and other necessary expenses of a hunting and fishing voyage based on the "Dolphin's" voyage of a.d. 1887. In order to fit up the "Dolphin" for such voyage in 1888, it is necessary that she be in her owner's possession on or before the 1st day of February of that year. If not at Victoria aforesaid about that date, it will be impossible fflMlMIMTOlMJIMtH B^SBUi to put her in order and condition to leave on such a voyage at the usual time, namely, about the 1st March. During the summer months there is little or no coasting trade for a vessel of the elass and equipment of the "Dolphin," and unless she can be sent out on a regular full season of hunting and fishing, her owner will practically lose the profits of the s.eftson. • And I verily believe that 7,000 dollars is a fair and reasonable estimate of the earning ftf the ■■ Dolphin " on such a full season's hunting an.d fishing voyage. 19. That herete annexed, marked " (E)," is a statement of the principal sums on which intet§§t at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which it is so claimed. At ttfee time when the catch of the "Dolphin " for the season of 1887 would, in the ordinary course of events, have been realized on, namely, on or about the 1st October of that year, the mjpimurn; rate} of interest on money for commercial purposes, &t Victoria aforesaid was, has continued to be, and now is, 7 per ceo,t, per appum. 20. That hereto annexed, marked " (F)," is a statement showing the various artioJfSj. and groups of articles, comprised in the outfit of the "Dolphin," and the value thereof, as given in Exhibit (A), which would have been wholly or almost wholly consumed on a full season's hunting and fishing voyage, such as that contemplated by the " Dolphin " in 1887. And 1, Jam.es Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and bv virtue of the " Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and agirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton, in thj Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public for Ontario. Exhibit (A). Value of steam-schooner " Dolphin" at the time of her seizure. Outfit— ■ Groceries .. .. ., .. ., -A^sumiB^tion PrJ' goods.. Two iron water-tanl Water-casks &bip chandelry Twenty-three shot guns Four rifles.. One bomb-eun for signalling Gun implements and tools TMytegji canoeg and outfit On,e secpnd-hand hoat One new boat (returned). 9 tons salt.. 41 ^ons coal .. .. .. .. Cooking range an(l utensils ., .. .. J nsurance— Premium on 2,000£ insurance on hull .. .. .. premium on 2,000^. insurance on outfit and cargo, Wages paid crew and hunters on voyage up to date of seizure .. Fares and expenses of master and mate, and five of crew, from Victoria, B. O, .. .. .. .. ,. 618 scjl-s.kins on board " Dolphin " when seized, at 5 dol. 50 c. per Dol. c. Dol. c. 12,000 00 985 68 24Q 22 229 30 25 00 55 00 £62 03 920 00 90 00 60 00 10 50 741 00 75 00 135 00 287 QQ 75 00 4,190 73 821 40 514 59 1,335 99 .. 1,899 50 Sitka to ,, 300 00 skin .. VP-? 00 23,125 22 (Signed) D. O'Coiraou, Notary Public. J. D. WARREN. s-aBaaaHSBaKSSwraaHBUHSSESSBBM 159 Exhibit (C). Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with the seizure and detention of the " Dolphin," and arrest of master and mate .. .. .. Counsel and other legal fees and expenses in and about the seizure of the " Dolphin," and the claim arising therefrom ., Personal expenses of the owner in the same connection,. Total (Signed) /.Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. Dol. c. loo oo 750 00 250 00 1,100 00 j. d. warren. Exhibit (D).—Estimated Loss and Damages to the owner of the "Dolphin" by reason of her Seizure and Detention during .A.D. 1887. Dol. c. .Reasonable and probable catch of seal-skins for season 1887 . 4,500 Less humber on board when seized .. .. .. 618 Balance, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. 3,882 = .21,351 00 Reasonable earnings of the " Dolphin " during the months of October, November, and December a.d. 1887, and January &.». 1888, had she been in owner's possession, viz., four months, at 500 dollars per month .. .. .. .. .. ., ' EstinVated loss for sealing season of 1888, if "Dolphin" not in possession of owner on or before the 1st February, 1888 .. .. Total (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. 2,000 oo 7,ooo oo 30,351 00 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (E).—Estimate of the Principal Sums on which Interest at 7 percent, per annum is claimed, and the time for which it is so claimed. Value of the ■estimated catch of the " Dolphin" for the seasoh of 1887, from the 1st Octocer, 1887, about which time the said catch would have been realized on, viz., 4,500 seal-skins, at 5 dol. 50 c. Cash expenditure for legal and other expenses on account of said seizure prior to the 1st October, 1887 Total principal •on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed from the 1st October, 1887, to date of payment of claim .. Dol. c. 24,750 00 400 OO (Signed) 25,150 00 I D. WARREN, (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. Exhibit (F).—VAiiTJE of the Articles of the "Dolphin's " Outfit which would have been wholly or almost wholly consumed on a full hunting and sealing voyage. Groceries Ammunition ,. Dry goods Ship chandlery .. Salt Coal Wages Insurance premiums Memo. (Signed) Total value consumed .. .. .. (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. Dql. c. . 985 68 , £40 &2 . 229 30 m 262 03 .. 135 00 .. 287 00 jjj . 1,899 50 1,335 99 • 5,374 72 J. D. WARREN If the full claim for the sealing season of 1887, as set out in Exhibit (D), be allowed, then the amount of this Exhibit, 5,374 dol. 72 c, will properly appear as a credit, and be deducted from the total of Exhibit (A), of which it forms a part. 160 Inclosure 11 in No. 'JO. Efilli Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. I am the duly authorized agent, under power of attorney bearing date the 23rd day of November, a.d. 1887, in this behalf of the firm of Gutman and Frank, of the city of Victoria aforesaid, merchants, the said Gutman being owner of the hereinafter-mentioned schooner " Alfred Adams," and his partner, the said Frank, being equally interested with Gutman in the results of the sealing voyage hereinafter referred to. 2. The said schooner "Alfred Adams" is a British vessel of 69f tons, registered at Victoria aforesaid. 3. That on or about the last of May, or early in June, a.d. 1887, the said schooner "Alfred Adams" sailed from the port of Victoria aforesaid, on a full hunting and sealing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. On or for said voyage the crew of the " Alfred Adams " consisted of William H. Dyer, master, a mate, and crew of twenty-four sailors and hunters, and fully equipped and provisioned. 4. That on the 10th day of July, a.d. 1887, the "Alfred Adams" entered Behring's Sea, and continued therein until the 6th day of August following, when, in north latitude 54° 48', and west longitude 167° 49', then being about 62 miles from Ounalaska Island, the nearest land, and lawfully, as I verily believe, pursuing the objects of the said voyage, the " Alfred Adams" was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush " for alleged violation of the laws of the United States respecting seal- fishing in the waters of Alaska. 5. That immediately after such seizure the Commander of the " Richard Rush " ordered the seal-skins then on board the "Alfred Adams," and all the firearms and ammunition, and Indian spears on board, to be taken out, and said seal-skins to the number of 1,386, and the firearms, ammunition, and spears, were taken from the said schooner " Alfred Adams," and conveyed to the said United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush." The ship's papers of the " Alfred Adams " were also taken from her by the Commander of the " Richard Rush," and, as I verily believe, the master and mate of the " Alfred Adams" placed under arrest, though not actually imprisoned. 6. Hereto annexed, marked " (A)," is a statement of articles and value thereof, as claimed by tbe said Gutman and Frank, which were so taken by the "Alfred Adams." 7. That hereto annexed, marked " (B)," is an estimate of the loss claimed by the said Gutman and Frank, as resulting to them by reason of the seizure of the "Alfred Adamg," herein set out, and of the legal and personal expenses incurred by reason of said seizure and the claims arising therefrom. The price per skin charged for the estimated catch of the " Alfred Adams " for a full season, namely, 5 dol. 50 c. per skin, was the current market price per skin at Victoria at the close of the sealing season of 1887. The catch of the " Alfred Adams " for said season is estimated from an average catch per canoe of 350 seals, the " Alfred Adams " having on said voyage ten canoes. 8. That hereto annexed, marked "(E)," is a statement of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, the rate per cent., and the time from and to which it is so claimed. At the time when the catch of the " Alfred Adams" for the season of 1887 would have been, in the ordinary course of events, realized on, namely, on or about the 1st October, a.d. 1887, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes at Victoria aforesaid was 7 per cent, per annum. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carletnn and Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public for Ontario. 161 Exhibit (A).—Statement of the Articles, and the Value thereof, taken from the Schooner " Alfred Adams" by the United States' Steam-ship " Richard Rush," in Behring's Sea, the 6th August, 1887. 1,386 seal-skins, at 5 doi. 50 r. per skin Four kegs of powder at 10 dollars 500 shells .. Three cages caps and primers .. Nine breech-loading shot guns .. One Winchester rifle .. .. Twelve Indian spears.. .. Total value taken (S jgned) (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. Dol. c. , 7,623 oo 40 00 60 00 60 00 450 00 25 00 48 00 8,306 00 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (B).—Loss to the Owner of the " Alfred Adams " by reason of her being forced to leave Behring's Sea, and return to Victoria, British Columbia. Reasonable and probable catch of seals by the " Alfred Adams" for the season of 1887 .. .. .. .. .. 3,500 Less number on board when seized, and charged in Exhibit (A) .. 1,386 Dol. Balance, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. 2,114 - 11,627 00 Dol. c. Legal expenses in connection with the claims arising from said seizure 300 00 Personal expenses in the same connection .. .. .. 200 00 500 00 Total (Signed) .. 12,127 00 J. D. WARREN. (Signed) D. O'Connoe, Notary Public. Exhibit (E).—Principal Sum on which Interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, and the Time for which it is so claimed. Dol. c. Value of the probable catch of the "Alfred Adams" for season of 1887, from the 1st October, 1887, on or about which date said catch would have been realized on, viz., 3,500 seal-skins, at 5 dol. 50 c. .. .. .. 19,250 00 Total sum on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, from the 1st October, 1887, until time of payment .. .. ., ., 19,250 00 (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. J. D. WARREN. Inclosure 12 in No. 90. Declaration of James Douglas Warren. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, JAMES DOUGLAS WARREN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I an\ the duly authorized agent, under power of attorney bearing date the 25th day of November, ad. 1887, of James J. Gray, of the said city of Victoria, shipowner, and owner of the hereafter-mentioned schooner " Ada." 2. That the said schooner. "Ada" is a British vessel of 65 tons, registered at the port of Shanghae, and was, at the time of her seizure hereinafter set out, 5 years old. 3. That on or about the 16th day of June, a.d. 1887, the said schooner "Ada" cleared at the port of Victoria aforesaid, on and for a full hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. For said voyage the crew of the " Ada " [128] T mam 162 RAM consisted of James Gaudin, master, a mate, and twenty sailors and hunters, with two sealing-boats and seven canoes, and fully equipped and provisioned for such voyage. 4. The "Ada" entered Behring's Sea on or about the 16th day of July, a.d. 1887, and continued therein lawfully pursuing the objects of her voyage until the 25th day of August then next following, when, while so lawfully pursuing the objects of her voyage in said sea about 15 miles northward from Ounalaska Island,. which said island was the nearest land, the said schooner was seized by the United States' steam-ship § Bear," and taken to Illoolook Harbour at said Ounalaska Island, in the United States' Territory of Alaska, and her voyage completely broken up. 5. At the time of said seizure the "Ada" had on board 1,876 seal-skins, which upon arrival at Illoolook Harbour aforesaid were taken from on board the " Ada" and stored on shore, after which, by order of the United States' authorities, the " Ada" was taken to Sitka, in said Territory of Alaska, together with the master, mate, and erew. 6. That the said " Ada "arrived at Sitka on the 6th day of September, a.d. 1887, and on the 9th day of the said month her master and mate were, without being tried for any offence whatever, unconditionally released, but the " Ada" kept at Sitka, where she still remains. 7. That hereto annexed, marked " (A)," is a statement showing the value of the " Ada " at the time of her said said seizure, and the value of her outfit on and for said voyage, also of the number and value of the seal-skins taken from the "Ada" when seized, and also of the expenses of the master and mate of the " Ada" in returning from Victoria to Sitka. 8. The value placed on the " Ada" by her said owner at time of seizure, namely, 7,000 dollars, is a fair and reasonable value for the "Ada" when seized. She is a substantially built craft in every respect, and is one of the best sailing-vessels engaged in the sealing trade. The value of the "Ada's" outfit given in said Exhibit, namely, 2,500 dollars, is less than that of any of the other seized vessels from the fact that the "Ada's " hunters were mostly Indians, whose canoes and outfits were returned after such seizure, and said outfit not including wages. 9. The price charged for the seal-skins taken from the "Ada "when seized is fhe current market price of seal-skins at Victoria at the close of the sealing season of 1887. 10. That the Exhibit (C), hereto annexed, shows the legal and personal expenses incurred by the owner of ihe "Ada" by reason of the seizure and detention of the said schooner "Ada," and the arrest and detention of the master and mate, and the claims arising therefrom. 11. That Exhibit (D), hereto annexed, is a statement of the estimated loss and damage to the owner of said schooner " Ada" by reason of her said seizure and detention during 1887, and the loss for 1888 if she is detained beyond the 1st February, 1888. 12. The claim of 1,000 seal-skins as the probable additional catch of the "Ada" for the balance of the sealing season, had she not been seized, is a fair and reasonable estimate, and with her actual catch, making a total for the season of 2,876, which, as she carried two boats, seven canoes, and twenty hunters, cannot be considered an excessive estimate. 13. During the months of October, November, December, and January following the close of the sealing season, or the greater part thereof, had the | Ada " been in her owner's possession, she would have been engaged in the general coasting and freighting trade on and about the coasts of British Columbia, and the fair and reasonable earnings of the " Ada " during said months, after deducting from the gross amount thereof the cost of wages and running expenses, would be at least 500 dollars per month. 14. In case the " Ada " be not delivered into her owner's possession at Victoria on or before the 1st day of February, a.d. 1888, it will be impossible to give her the necessary repairs and refitting in time to start out at the usual date, about the 1st March, on a full season's huntine; and fishine. As during the summer months there is little coasting and freighting trade in which the " Ada" could be employed, her owner would, in the event of her not being ready in time for a regular hunting and fishing voyage, practically lose the greater part of the season, and the earnings of the | Ada " for such full season, after deducting therefrom the cost of outfit, wages, and other running expenses, would be at least, under circumstances, 6,000 dollars. 15. That hereto annexed, marked " (E)," is a statement of the principal sums on which interest at 7 per cent, is claimed, and the time from and to which it is so claimed. At the close of the sealing season of 1887, when the catch of the "Ada," in the ordinary course of events, would have been realized on, the minimum rate of interest on money for commercial purposes was, has continued to be, and now is, 7 per cent, per annum. And I, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously 163 believing the same to be true, and bv virtue of the " Act respecting Extra-judicial Oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton and Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public for Ontario. Exhibit (A). Value of the schooner "' Ada " at the time of her seizure by the United States' steam-ship " Bear," the 25th August, 1887 Value of " Ada's " outfit at the same time Value of seal-skins on board at seizure, viz., 1,876 skins, at 5 dol. 50 c. per skin .. ,.. .. .. Passage and expenses of master of " Ada " from Sitka to Victoria .. .. (Signed) Total, Exhibit (A) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. c. 7,000 oo 2,500 00 10,318 00 100 00 ... 19,918 00 J. D. WARREN, Exhibit (C). • Legal expenses at Sitka in connection with said seizure Counsel and other legal fees and exp'enses, exclusive of the above, in reference to the seizure and claims arising therefrom .. .. .. .. Personal expenses of the owner in the same connection .. .. .. (Signed) Total. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public, Dol. c. 100 oo 750 oo 250 00 1,100 00 J. D. WARREN; Exhibit (D). Estimated additional catch of seal-skins by schooner " Ada " had she not been seized, viz.: 1,000 skins, at 5 dol. 50 c. Loss to owner of "Ada" by reason of her detention during the months of October, November, and December a.d. 1887, and January 1888, during which she would have been engaged in the coasting trade, namely, four months, at 500 dollars each If owner not put in possession of " Ada" on or before the 1st February, 1888, so that she may be fitted out for hunting and fishing voyage of 1888, reasonable and probable profit on season of 1888 (Signed) Total, Exhibit (D) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Dol. c 5,500 00 2,000 00 6,000 00 13,500 00 J. D. WARREN. Exhibit (E).—Principal Sums on which Interest is claimed at 7 per cent, per annum, and the Time for which it is so claimed. Dol. c. Value of the probable full catch of "Ada" for season of 1887, viz., 2,876 skins, at 5 dol. 50 c. .. .. .. .. .. .. 15,818 00 Cash outlay prior to tbe 1st October. 1887 .. .. .. .. 200 00 Total principal on which interest at 7 per cent, per annum is claimed, from the 1st October, 1887, to date of payment .. (Signed) (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public, 16,018 oo J. D, WARREN. [128] Y 2 mwm 164 No. 91. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 3.) Sir, Downing Street, February 3, 1888. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the British sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea, I am directed by the Secretary of State fcr the Colonies to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, reporting that orders have been issued by the United States' Government for the return to their owners of the vessels " Onward," " Thornton," and " Carolina," seized in 1886. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure I in No. 91. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, January 19, 1888, IN reference to my former despatches upon the subject of the seizure of Canadian sealing-vessels during the years 1886-87 by United States' cruziers for fishing in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to report that my Minister of Marine and Fisheries has received from the Customs authorities at Victoria an intimation addressed by the United States' Marshal at Sitka to Mr. Spring, the owner of the " Onward," one of the three vessels seized in 1886, to the effect that that vessel, as well as the "Thornton" and "Carolina," with their tackle, apparel, and furniture, as they now lie in the harbour of Ounalaska, arc to be restored to their owners. A copy of this intimation is inclosed herewith. 2. The information received by my Minister is to the effect that the condition of these three vessels, owing to the length of time during which they have been lying on the shore, is now such as to render it questionable whether they could, under present circumstances, be repaired and removed with advantage. The difficulty of doing this would be increased, from the fact that the vessels have been released at a season of the year in which, owing to the great distance between Victoria and Ounalaska, it would be scarcely possible for the owners to fit out steamers for the purpose of going up to Ounalaska to repair their vessels and bring them home. 3. I also inclose herewith copy of an extract from an American newspaper (the name and date of publication are not given), from which it would appear that the District Judge has made an order for the sale of the arms and ammunition taken from the three schooners in question upon the supposed ground that, as the instructions sent by the United States' Government to Sitka for the liberation of the vessels made no mention of the arms and ammunition on board of them, the Court concluded that these should be confiscated and sold. It would seem from the same extract that the remaining vessels held in Alaska are not included in the order sent by the United States' Government for the release of the "Thornton," "Carolina," and "Onward," and are therefore likely to be confiscated and sold with their contents and equitment. 5. I have already dwelt at sufficient length upon the extent of the hardships involved to the crews and the owners of these vessels by the action of the United States' Government, and I will only, upon the present occasion, remind you that another fishing season is approaching, and that, as far as my Government is aware, no declaration has been made by that of the United States in regard to the policy which it intends to adopt during the course of the year which has just commenced. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 91. Mr. B. Atkins to Mr. C. Spring. Office of United States' Marshal, Sitka, District of Alaska, Sir, December 5, 1887. I TAKE pleasure in informing you and other owners of the schooners seized in the Behring's Sea by United States' steamer | Corwin," that 1 am in receipt of orders from ai'MEgatimigiwmwwwwwwwag'WB 165 Washington to restore to their owners the schooners "Onward," "Thornton," and "Carolina," their tackle, apparel, and furniture, as they now lie in the harbour of Ounalaska. Orders for their release have been forwarded to their custodian at Ounalaska. Very respectfully, (Signed) BARTON ATRINS, United States' Marshal, District of Alaska. Inclosure 3 in No. 91. Extract from American Newspaper (name and date unknown). Alaska News.—Judge Dawson has made an order for the sale, at Juneau, of the arms and ammunition taken from the British schooners "Thornton," "Carolina," and "Onward," captured last year by the " Corwin." Attorney-General Garland sent instructions to Sitka to have the three vessels liberated, but, as he made no mention of tbe arms and ammunition, the Court concluded that they must be sold, and gave directions accordingly. . The Marshal has further been authorized to sell the schooner " W. P. Sayward" (British), and the " Alpha," " Kate," and " Anna," and "Sylvia Handy" (American), together with their boats, tackle, and furniture. By stipulation entered into last September between Mr. Delaney, acting for the United States, and Mr. Drake, Q.C., representing the Canadian Government, the remaining British schooners cannot be sold until the expiration of three months from the 11th January next, and then only by the District Attorney giving the owners ninety days' notice. Application granted:— In the cases of the schooners "Lily L.," W. P. Sayward," "Annie," " Allie J. Alger," " Alpha," " Kate and Anna," and " Sylvia Handy," an application made by Attorney W. Clark, counsel for the owners, for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, was granted. A motion presented by the same attorney for a stay of proceedings for three months in the cases of the " W. P. Sayward," "Alpha," | Kate and Anna," and " Sylvia Handy," was refused by the Court,, on the ground that the owners had ample time in which to prepare for their appeals, and it was entirely their own fault if they had not done so. No. 92. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 13.) (Extract.) Downing Street, February 13, 1888. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the claims of British subjects against the Government of the United States arising out of the seizure of or interference with certain sealing vessels in the Behring's Sea, I am directed by Secretary Sir Henry Holland to transmit to you, to be laid before Lord Salisbury, copies of two further despatches from the Governor-General relating to further claims in the cases of the vessels " Thornton," " Carolina," and " Onward," and of the vessels " Dolphin," " W. P. Sayward," "Anna Beck," " Grace," and "Ada." Inclosure 1 in No. 92. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. Sir, Government House, Otlarra, January 20, 1888. WITH reference to my despatches of tbe 2nd and 23rd December last, transmitting revised statements of the claims of the owners of the " Thornton," " Carolina," and I Onward," seized in Behring's Sea during the season of 1886 by the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin," 1 have the honour to forward herewith, for presentation to the United States' Government, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting a revised statement of the claims of the masters and mates of the above-mentioned vessels. My Minister of Marine and Fisheries considers that these revi§ed claims are just T66 and reasonable, and expressed the hope that prompt reparatibn may be made to those persons for the sufferings and losses they have sustained. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 92. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, January 12, 1888. ON a Report dated 5th January, 1888, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, stating, with reference to the Minute of Council of the 3rd January, 1887, transmitting claims of the owners, masters, and mates of the sealing-schooners "Thornton," " Carolina," and "Onward," which were seized in the Behring's Sea in August, 1886, by the United States' revenue-cutter "Corwin/' and the despatch from the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated 14th September, 1887, returning these for revision, as well as to the Minutes of Council of the 29th November and 20th December, 1887, transmitting the revised claims of the schooners "Thornton" and "Carolina" and of the "Onward'' respectively, so far as the owners are concerned, that, the personal claims for illegal arrest and imprisonment of the masters and mates of the above-mentioned vessels having been referred back to the parties interested, they have consented to accept a reduction of one- half the original claim as submitted : They would therefore be as follows :— Schooner " Thornton "— Hans Guttermsen, master Henry Norman, mate Schooner " Carolina"— James Ogilvie, master James Black, mate Schooner " Onward "— Daniel Munroe, master John Margotich, mate Dol. c. 4,000 00 2,500 00 2,500 00 2,500 00 4,000 00 2,500 00 The Minister, believing these revised claims to be just and reasonable, recommends that they be forwarded for presentation to the United States' Government, and expresses the hope that prompt reparation may be made to those persons for the sufferings and losses they have sustained. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward the claims herein mentioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the United States' Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 92. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir H. Holland. g. ir, Government House, Ottawa, January 18, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 5th instant, transmitting detailed statements of the claims of the owners and agents of the Canadian sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea during the past season, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Report of the Committee of the Privy Council, submitting the personal claims of the masters and mates of the " Dolphin," " W. P. Sayward," " Anna Beck," 1 Grace," and "Ada." My Minister of Marine and Fisheries is of opinion that the claims submitted are just and reasonable, and recommends that they be presented to the United States' Government with the hope that prompt reparation may be made' to these persons for the sufferings and losses they have sustained. I have &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. 167 Inclosure 4 in No. 92. R-eport of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, January 12, 1888. ON a Report, dated the 29th December, 1887, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in connection with the seizures of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea during the seasons of 1886 and 1887, the personal claims of the following' masters and mates of the seized vessels:— Schooner " Dolphin "— Warren, captain .. .. .. .. .. ... John Keilly, mate.. Schooner " W. P. Sayward "— Geo. R. Ferey, captain ,. A. D. Laing, mate Schooner " Anna Beck "— fePK? Louis Olsen, captain .. .. .. .. Michael Keefe, mate .'. Schooner " Grace "— Wm. Petit, captain Schooner "Ada"— Charles A. Lundberg, mate The Minister believes that these claims are just and reasonable, and recommends that they be forwarded to Her Majesty's Government for presentation to the Government of the United States, and he expresses the hope that prompt reparation may be made to these persons for the sufferings and losses they have sustained. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward the claims herein mentioned to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the United States' Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Dol. c. .. 2,635 00 .. 1,000 00 .. 2,000 00 .i 1,000 00 2,000 00 .. 1,000 00 .. 2,000 00 .. 2,000 00 Declaration. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, James Douglas Warren, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. That I was master of the British steam-schooner "Dolphin," of Victoria aforesaid, on the 12th day of July, a.d. 1887, the said schooner on that day being in that part of the North Pacific Ocean called Behring's Sea, lawfully engaged in seal-fishing. 2. That on the said 12th day of July, a.d. 1887, the said steam-schooner "Dolphin " was seized by the United States' steam-ship | Richard Rush," and I was made a prisoner and taken on board of the said steam-ship " Richard Rush " with the ship's papers of the said "Dolphin." 3. That shortly afterwards on the same day I was sent back on board the " Dolphin," which, in command of an officer from the said "Richard Rush," was taken to Ounalaska Island, in the United States' territory of Alaska, from which place a few days after I was sent—with the said steam-schooner | Dolphin," in command of an officer from the said "Richard Rush"—to Sitka, in the said territory of Alaska. On arrival at Sitka I was handed over to the United States' Marshal of the territory of Alaska, in whose custody I remained from the'1st day of August, a.d. 1887, until the 16th day of August instant, when I was taken before the United States' District Court at Sitka, formally charged with having violated the laws of the United States relating to seal fishing in the waters of Alaska, and upon my own recognizance of 500 dollars released to appear for trial on said charge on the 22nd day of August then instant, and to appear from day to day thereafter until I should be so tried. I did so appear on the days so ordered unlil the 9th day of September following, when, without so being tried on said charge, or any other charge or offence whatever, I was unconditionally released by order of the Judge of said Court, and for the said illegal arrest and imprisonment I claimed as damages the sum of 2,000 dollars. 4. That at the same time I was arrested, as aforesaid, one John Reilly was mate of the said steam-schooner "Dolphin," and lam the duly authorized agent in this behalf of the said John Reilly, mate of the said " Dolphin." 5. The said John Reilly was arrested, taken to Ounalaska, thence to Sitka, delivered am SOfrSbi 168 into the custody of the United States' Marshal of Alaska, arraigned, allowed bail, and finally released at the same place, time, and manner in which I was, as set out in the declaration, and the said John Reilly, by me, his duly authorized agent in this behalf, claims 1,000 dollars as damages for said illegal arrest and detention. 6. That after arrival of said steam-schooner " Dolphin " at Ounalaska aforesaid, after her seizure, I agreed with the Commander of the said " Richard Rush" to navigate the said " Dolphin " from Ounalaska to Sitka, for which purpose I engaged the crew on board the " Dolphin " after seizure, agreeing to pay them their ordinary wages therefor. I did so navigate the said "Dolphin" from Ounalaska to Sitka with the said crew, but I have never been paid therefor, nor have the said crew been paid the wages promised and agreed to be paid them therefor. The said trip from Ounalaska to Sitka took about fifteen days, and the amount due me for said services for myself and crew amount to 160 dollars, which said sum I hereby claim as justly due me for such services. 7. That at the time I agreed with the said Commander of the " Richard Rush " to navigate the said " Dolphin " from Ounalaska to Sitka I also agreed to furnish officers and crews to navigate the screw-schooners " Grace " and | Anna Beck " from Ounalaska to Sitka. I did so provide for their navigation from and to said places, and agreed to pay their said officers and crew ordinary wages for their services in so doing. The " Grace " and "Anna Beck" were so taken from Ounalaska to Sitka; the voyage took about fifteen days, and the amount due to master and mates and crew therefore 160 dollars for each of the said vessels " Grace " and | Anna Beck," and I claim therefore 320 dollars for said services. I also claim 155 dollars for similar services in navigating the schooner " W. P. Sayward," by her master and crew, from Ounalaska to Sitka. The said schooner IW. P. Sayward " and steam-schooners " Grace," " Dolphin," and " Anna Beck " are still at Sitka, and are about one-half the distance from Victoria they were when at Ounalaska, and can be got at any time of the year, while, had they remained at Oonalaska, they could only have been reached during the summer months, and then at a cost two or three times as great as now. 8. That I am the duly authorized agent of the owner of and manager of the said schooner " W. P. Say ward " and of the said steam-schooners "Grace," "Dolphin," and I Anna Beck." And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting extra-judicial oaths. (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me at the city of Ottawa, in the County of Carleton l Province of Ontario, this 9th day of December a.d. 1887, and certified under my offi seal. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public for Ontario. Exhibit (A.) James D. Warren's claim for illegal arrest .. .. .. John Reilly's claim for illegal arrest .. .. .. .. James D. Warren's claim for navigating steam-schooner " Dolphin'' from Ouna laska to Sitka .. .. .. .. .. .. James D. Warren's claim for navigating steam-schooners " Grace" and " Anna Beck" .. .. .. James D. Warren's claim for navigating steam-schooner " W. P. Sayward' Total. (Signed) Dol. c. #„ 2,000 00 • • 1,000 00 una- .. 160 00 \nna . 320 00 •• 155 00 •• 3,635 00 J. D . WARREN. (Signed) D. O'Connor, Notary Public. Damages claimed by George R. Ferey, Master of the schooner " W. P. Sayward," for illegal arrest and detention on board the United States' steam-ship "Rush," and at Sitka, from July 9 to September 10, 1887. British Columbia, to wit. I, GEORGE R. FEREY, of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, master mariner, and master of the schooner " W. P. Saywari'' solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— ^vs^j^tttxmsmwwsxxsEnrmssiXXExyia 169 1. That I was on the 9th July, 1887, master of the schooner " W. P. Sayward"; at that date the said schooner was in the Behring's Sea. 2. That on the said 9th July the said schooner " W. P. Sayward " was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Rush," and I was made a prisoner and taken on board the said steam-ship " Rush " with the papers of the said schooner " W. P. Sayward." 3. The Captain of the said steam-ship "Rush" told me I was in his charge, and must obey bis orders; he sent me back to the said schooner " W. P. Sayward," made her fast to the " Rush," and towed her to Ounalaska, from which place we were distant at time of said seizure about 80 miles. 4. When I arrived at Ounalaska aforesaid I was given into the charge of a Deputy United States' Marshal, and next day I, in the said schooner " W. P. Sayward," in charge of a Deputy Marshal, was sent on my way to Sitka, where I arrived on the 22nd July, and was there delivered into the custody of the United States Marshal. 5. That on the 23rd July I was brought before Judge Dawson, the Judge of the District Court at Sitka, and placed under bond of 500 dollars to appear before the said District Court on the 22nd August, 1887. I had to remain at Sitka from the said 23rd July, and on the 22nd August, 1887, I appeared before the said District Court, and so on from day to day until the 10th September, when Judge Dawson aforesaid discharged me, stating he had received instructions from Washington to release all parties connected with the seized sealers. 6. I claim as damages for my said illegal arrest and detention the sum of 2,000 dollars. 7. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Oaths Ordinance, 1869." (Signed) GEORGE R. FEREY: Declared before me at Victoria, this 2nd November, 1887, in pursuance of the Oaths Ordinance, 1869. (Signed) Chas. E. Pooley, Notary Public, Victoria, British Columbia. Declaration. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, James Douglas Warren, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, of the Dominion of Canada, master mariner and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That 1 am the duly authorized agent in this behalf of Andrew D. Laing, of the city of Victoria aforesaid, mate and partner of the British schooner " W. P. Sayward," as the time of her seizure as stated herein. 2. That on the 9th July, a.d. 18S7, the said schooner "W. P. Sayward," while in Behring's Sea, in north latitude 54° 43', and west longitude 167° 51', and lawfully engaged in sealing, she was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush," and the said Andrew D. Laing, mate of the said schooner 1W. P. Sayward," was then placed under arrest by an officer of and from the said " Richard Rush." 3. That, by authority of the Commander of the said "Richard Rush," the said mate was taken first to Ounalaska Island, in the United States' Territory of Alaska, and thence to Sitka, in said Territory of Alaska, and there arraigned for trial on the 22nd August, 1887, being admitted to bail in the meantime. The said Andrew D. Laing pleaded "not guilty" to the charge preferred against him, namely, that of violating the laws of the United States respecting seal fishing in the waters of Alaska, and appeared on the said 22nd August for trial, and from day to day thereafter until the 9th September following, when without having been tried on said charge, or for any offence whatever, he was unconditionally released. 4. And the said. Andrew D. Laing, by me, his duly authorized agent in this behalf, claims 1,000 dollars as damages for such illegal arrest. And 1, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Act respecting extra-judicial oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me, at the city of Ottawa, in the county of Carleton and Province of Ontario, this 9th December, 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) J. M. Balderson, Notary Public for Ontario. [128] Z mm mm&msmma tavh 170 Declaration. City of Ottawa, Province of Ontario, Dominion of Canada. I, James Douglas Warren, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, of the Dominion of Canada, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the duly authorized agent of Louis Olsen, of the said city of Victoria, in this behalf, master mariner, and master of the steam-schooner " Anna Beck " at the time hereinafter mentioned. 2. That on the 2nd July, a.d. 1887, the said " Anna Beck," while in Behring's Sea in north latitude 54° 58' and west longitude 167° 26', and lawfully engaged in seal fishing, was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Richard Rush," and the said Louis Olsen, as master thereof, made prisoner by an officer of and from said steam-ship "Richard Rush." 3. An armed crew from the said "Richard Rush" took charge of the said "Anna Beck," and took her and her crew to Ounalaska, in the Territory of Alaska. The said Louis Olsen was kept in custody at Ounalaska until the 5th day of said July, when he was sent as a prisoner to Sitka, in the said Territory of Alaska, on board the American schooner "Challenge," in charge of an officer from the said "Richard Rush." 4. After bis arrival at Sitka the said master of the | Anna Beck" was arraigned before a Judge of the District Court on a charge of having violated the laws of the United States respecting seal fishing in the waters of Alaska. He pleaded "not guilty "to said charge, and was ordered to appear for trial on the 22nd day of August then instant, and thereafter from day to day until so tried, in the meantime being allowed out on bail on his own recognizance for 500 dollars. He so appeared for trial on the said 22nd day of August, and day by day thereafter, until the 9th day of September following, when, without being so tried on said charge or any other charge whatever, he was unconditionally released, and the said Louis Olsen, by me, his agent in his behalf, claims 2,000 dollars as damages for such illegal arrest and detention. And 1, James Douglas Warren aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Act respecting extra-judicial oaths." (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Declared and affirmed before me, at the city of Ottawa, in the county of Carleton, this 9th day of December, a.d. 1887, and certified under my official seal. (Signed) J. M. Balderson, Notary Public for Ontario. Sir, Langley Street, Victoria, B.C., November 30, 1887. We have the honour to forward herewith the claim of Mr. Michael Keefe against the American Government for damages for illegal arrest and detention by the American steamship "Rush" while he was acting as mate of the steam-vessel "Anna Beck." We have, &c. ; (Signed) DAVIE ano POOLEY, Barristers, 2fc. The Hon. the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, Ottawa. Damages claimed by Michael Keefe, Mate of the Steam-vessel "Anna Beck," for illegal arrest and detention by the United States' Steam-ship " Rush," and at Sitka, from July 20 to September 10, 1887. British Columbia, to wit. I, Michael Keefe, of Victoria, in the province of British Columbia, master mariner, and chief mate of the steam-vessel "Anna Beck," solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. That I was on the 2nd day of July 1887 chief mate of the steam-vessel "Anna Beck;" at that date the said steam-vessel was in the Behring's Sea engaged in seal-fishing. 2. That on the said 2nd day of July the said steam-vessel "Anna Beck" was seized by the United States' steam-ship " Rush," and I was made a prisoner and taken on board the said steam-ship "Anna Beck," in charge of an armed crew from the said steam-ship "Rush," to Ounalaska, where we arrived on the 3rd day of July 1887. 3. At the time of the said seizure the said steam-vessel " Anna Beck " was 73 miles from the nearest land. 4. When we arrived at Ounalaska we were kept in custody by the said steam-ship " Rush " until the 5th day of July, when I and the rest of the crew of the said steam-vessel "Anna Beck" were transferred to the American schooner "Challenge," and were sent to ^^^m^^^pHa^tWjyMMMM,^ 171 Sitka, Alaska, in charge of a quartermaster from the said steam-ship "Rush," where we arrived on the 20th day of July 1887. 5. On the 22nd day of July I was taken before Judge Dawson, of the United States' District Court, by the United States' Marshal, and was charged with taking seals illegally in Alaskan waters. I pleaded " not guilty " to the charge, and I was released on my own bond of 500 dollars to appear when called upon after the arrival of the " Rush," which was expected to arrive in August. 6. On the 27th day of July I appeared before the said Judge Dawson and told him I had no means of supporting myself, and he then handed me over to the custody of the United States' Marshal, in whose custody I remained until the 10th day of September, 1887, when the said Judge Dawson sent for me to court, when he released me, stating he had received a telegram from Washington instructing him to release all parties connected with the seized vessels. 7. I claim as damages for my said illegal arrest and detention the sum of 1,000 dollars. 8. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Oaths Ordinance, 1869." (Signed) MICHAEL KEEFE. Declared before me at Victoria, British Columbia, this 16th day of November, 1887, in pursuance of the "Oaths Ordinance, 1869." (Signed) Chas. E. Pooley, Notary Public, Damages claimed by William Petit, Master of the Steam-vessel " Grace," for illegal arrest and detention on board the United States' Steam-ship | Rush," and at Sitka, from July 17 to September 10, 1887. British Columbia, to wit. I, William Petit, of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, master mariner, and master of the steam-vessel | Grace," solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. That I was the master of the steam-vessel | Grace " on the 17th day of July, 1887 ; the said "vessel was at that date in the Behring's Sea, engaged in seal-fishing. 2. That on the said 17th day of July the said steam-vessel " Grace " was seized bv the United States' steam-ship " Rush," and I was made a prisoner and taken on board the said steam-ship " Rush " with the papers of the said steam..vessel " Grace." 3. That I was again sent back to my said steam-vessel | Grace," and an officer and two men from the said steam-ship "Rush" were placed in charge of her; and the said steam-vessel | Grace" was taken in tow by the said steam-ship " Rush," and brought into Ounalaska, which place at the time of seizure was 93 miles distant. 4. From Ounalaska aforesaid I was taken down to Sitka in my said steam-vessel " Grace," in charge of a Deputy United States' Marshal; and when I arrived at Sitka, on the 1st day of August, 1887, I was handed over to the custody of the United States' Marshal. 5. That I remained in the custody of the said United States' Marshal at Sitka until the 17th day of August, when I was arraigned before the District Court, and was remanded on my own bail of 500 dollars until the 21st day of August; and I appeared before the said Court on the said 2lst day of August, and thence on from day to day until the 10th day of September, 1887, when Judge Dawson, the Judge of the said District Court, discharged me, stating he had instructions from Washington to release all parlies connected with the seized sealers. 6. And for the said illegal arrest and detention I claim as damages the sum of 2,000 dollars. 7. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of "The Oaths Ordinance, 1869." (Signed) WILLIAM PETIT. Declared before me, at Victoria, this 2nd day of November, 1! I The Oaths Ordinance, 1869." (Signed) Chas. E. Pooley, Notary Public, Victoria, British Columbia. 17, in pursuance of [128] Z 2 fiKSSSn 172 Damages claimed by Charles August Lundberg, Chief Mate of the British Schooner " Ada," for illegal arrest and detention by the United States' Revenue Cutter " Bear," and by the United States' Marshal at Sitka, from August 25 to October 4, 1887. British Columbia, to wit. I, Charles August Lundberg, of Victoria, British Columbia, do solemnly and sincerely declare:— 1. That I sailed from the city of Victoria, as chief mate of the British schooner "Ada," on the 17th day of June, 1887, on a sealing voyage to the Behring's Sea. 2. That on the 25th day of August, 1887, in the Behring's Sea, and while engaged in the lawful business of the said voyage, the schooner "Ada" was seized and taken possession of by the United States' revenue-cutter "■Hear." The officers of the said cutter placed a crew on board of the said schooner, and towed her to Ounalaska. 3. At Ounalaska our cargo of seal-skins was taken out of the said schooner against the protest of the captain, and before our having a hearing before any legal Tribunal. I was then forced to go on the seized schooner, in charge of a United States' Deputy- Marshal, to Sitka, for trial, arriving at Sitka on the 5th day of September, 1887. 4. Upon arrival at Sitka the schooner was handed over to the United States' Marshal, and I was kept on board the vessel until the 9th day of the same month, when I was released. 5. I was without means or provisions, and nothing was done towards enabling me to return to my home until the 25th September, 1887, when T was sent on board the United States' revenue-cutter "Rush," and taken to Victoria, where I arrived on the 4th day of October, 1887. 6. For my damages, by reason of my illegal arrest and detention as aforesaid, I claim the sum of 2,000 dollars. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of " The Oaths Ordinance, 1869." (Signed) C. A. LUNDBERG. Declared at Victoria, British Columbia, this 9th day of November, a.d. 1887, before me, (Signed) Thornton Fell, Notary Public, Victoria, British Columbia. No. 93. Mr. Phelps to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received February 18.) My Lord, Legation of the United States, London, February 17, 1883. I HAVE the honour to inclose a printed copy of an important note relative to the Alaska seal fisheries which I have just received from my Government. It has reference to the proposal for some International Regulations at those fisheries which I had the honour to submit in general terms to your Lordship in a personal interview on the 17th November last, and which I then promised to ask my Government to state more precisely. As the matter is one that, as it appears to the United States' Government, should be dealt with immediately, and in which I presume both Governments will readily concur, I shall be glad of the honour of an interview with your Lordship at as early a day next week as may be convenient and agreeable to you, when the proposed restrictions and the method of carrying them into effect can be considered. I have, &c. (Signed) | J. PHELPS. Inclosure 1 in No. 93. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Phelps. Department of State, Washington, February 7, 1888. Sir, 1 HAVE received your despatch of the 12th November last, containing an account of your interview with Lord Salisbury of the preceding day, in which his Lordship expressed acquiescence in my proposal of an agreement between the United States and Great Britain 173 in regard to the adoption of concurrent regulations for the preservation of fur seals in Behring's Sea from extermination by destruction at improper seasons and by improper methods by the citizens of either country. In response to his Lordship's suggestion that this Government submit a sketch of a system of regulations for the purpose indicated, it may be expedient, before making a definite proposition, to describe some of the conditions of seal life. And for this purpose it is believed that a concise statement as to that part of the life of the seal which is spent in Behring's Sea will be sufficient. All those who have made a study of the seals in Behring's Sea are agreed that, on an average, from five to six months—that is to say, from the middle or towards the end of spring till the middle or end of October—are spent by them in those waters in breeding and in rearing their young. During this time they have their rookeries on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, which constitute the Pribyloff group and belong to the United States, and on the Commander Islands, which belong to Russia. But the number of animals resorting to the latter group is small in comparison with that resorting to the former. The rest of the year they are supposed to spend in the open sea south of the Aleutian Islands. Their migration northward, which has been stated as taking place during the spring and till the middle of June, is made through the numerous passes in the long>chain of the Aleutian Islands; above which the courses of their travel converge chiefly to the Pribyloff group. During this migration the female seals are so advanced in pregnancy that they generally give birlh to their young, which are commonly called pups, within two weeks after reaching the rookeries. Between the time of the birth of the pups and of the emigration of the seals from the islands in the autumn the females are occupied in suckling their young; and by far the largest part of the seals found at a distance from the islands in Behring's Sea during the summer and early autumn are females in search of food, which is made doubly necessary to enable them to suckle their young as well as to support a condition of renewed pregnancy, which begins in a week or a little more after their delivery. The male seals, or bulls, as they are commonly called, require little food while on the islands, where they remain "uarding their harems, watching the rookeries, and sustaining existence on (he large amount of blubber which they have secreted beneath their skirts and which is gradually absorbed during the five or six succeeding months. Moreover it is impossible to distinguish the male from the female seals in the water, or pregnant females from those that are not so. When the animals are killed in the water with firearms many sink at once and are never recovered, and some authorities state that not more than one out of three of those so slaughtered is ever secured. This may, however, be an over-estimate of the number lost. It is thus apparent that to permit the destruction of the seals by the use of firearms, nets, or other mischievous means in Behring's Sea would result in the speedy extermination of tbe race. There appears to be no difference of opinion on this subject among experts. And the fact is so clearly and forcibly stated in the Report of the Inspector of Fisheries for British Columbia of the 31st of December, 1886,-that I will quote therefrom the following pertinent passage:— &$$$• "There were killed this year, so far, from 40,000 to 50,000 fur seals which have been taken by schooners from San Francisco and Victoria. The greater number were killed in Behring's Sea, and were nearly all cows or female seals. This enormous catch, with the increase which will take place when the vessels fitting up every year are ready, will, 1 am afraid, soon deplete our fur seal fishery, and it is a great pity that such a valuable industry could not in some way be protected." [Report of Thomas Mowat, Inspector of Fisheries for British Columbia; Sessional Papers, Vol. 15, No. 16, p. 268 ; Ottawa, 1887.] The only way of obviating the lamentable iesult above predicted appears to be by the United States, Great Britain, and other interested Powers taking concerted action to prevent their citizens or subjects from killing fur seals with firearms, or other destructive weapons, north of 50° of north latitude, and between 160° of longitude west and 170° of longitude east from Greenwich, during the period intervening between 15th April and 1st November. To prevent the killing within a marine belt of forty or fifty miles from the Islands during that period would be ineffectual as a preservative measure. This would clearly be so during the approach of the seals to the Islands. And after their arrival there such a limit of protection would also be insufficient; since the rapid progress of the seals through the water enables them to go great distances from the islands in so short a time that it has been calculated that an ordinary seal could go to the Aleutian Islands and back, in all a distance of 360 or 400 miles, in less than a day. On the Pribyloff Islands themselves, where the killing is at present under the direction 174 of the Alaska Commercial Company, which by the terms of its contract is not permitted to take over 100,000 skins a year, no females, pups, or old bulls are ever killed, and thus the breeding of the animals is not interfered with. The old bulls are the first to reach the islands, where they await the coming of the females. As the young bulls arrive they are driven away by the old bulls to the sandy part of the islands, by themselves. And these are the animals that are driven inland and there killed by clubbing, so that the skins are no -perforated and discrimination is exercised in each case. That the extermination of the fur seals must soon take place unless they are protected from destruction in Behring's Sea is shown by the fate of the animal in other parts of the world, in tbe absence of concerted action among the nations interested for its preservation. Formerly many thousands of seals were obtained annually from the South Pacific Islands, and from the coasts of Chili and South Africa. They were also common in the Falkland Islands and the adjacent seas. But in those islands, where hundreds of thousands of skins were formerly obtained, there have been taken, according to best statistics, since 18S0, less than 1,500 skins. In some places the indiscriminate slaughter, especially by use of fire- arras, has in a few years resulted in completely breaking up extensive rookeries. At the present time it is estimated that out of an aggregate yearly yield of 185,000 seals from all parts of the globe over 130,000, or more than two-thirds, are obtained from the rookeries on the American and Russian islands in Behring's Sea. Of the remainder, the larger part are taken in Behring's Sea, although such taking, at least on such a scale, in that quarter is a comparatively recent thing. But if the killing of the fur seal there with fire-arms, nets, and other destructive implements were permitted, hunters would abandon other exhausted places of pursuit for the more productive field of Behring's Sea, where extermination of this valuable animal would also rapidly ensue. It is manifestly for the interests of all nations that so deplorable a thing should not be allowed to occur. As has already been stated, on the Pribyloff Islands this Government strictly limits the number of seals that may be killed under its own lease to an American Company; and citizens of the United States have, during the past year, been arrested, and ten American vessels seized for killing fur seals in Behring's Sea. England, however, has an especially great interest in this matter, in addition to that which she must feel in preventing the extermination of an animal which contributes so much to the gain and comfort of her people. Nearly all undressed fur seal skins are sent to London, where they are dressed and dyed for the market, and where many of them are sold. It is stated that at least 10,000 people in that city find profitable employment in this work; far more than the total number of people engaged in hunting the fur seal in every part of the world. At the Pribyloff Islands it is believed that there are not more than 400 persons so engaged ; at Commander Islands, not more than 300; in the north-west coast fishery, not more than 525 Indian hunters and 100 whites; and in the Cape Horn fishery not mrre than 400 persons, of whom perhaps 300 are Chileans. Great Britain, therefore, in cooperating with the United States to prevent the destruction of fur seals in Behring's Sea, would also be perpetuating an extensive and valuable industry in which her own citizens have the most lucrative share. I inclose for your information copy of a Memorandum on the fur seal fisheries of the world prepared by Mr. A. Howard Clark, in response to a request made by this Department to the United States' Fish Commissioner. I inclose also, for your further information, copy of a letter to me dated the 3rd December last, from Mr. Henry W. Elliott, who has spent much time in Alaska, engaged in the study of seal life, upon which he is well known as an authority. I desire to call your special attention to what is said by Mr. Elliott in respect to the new method of catching the seals with nets. As the subject of this despatch is one of great importance and of immediate urgency, I will ask that you give it as early attention as possible. I am, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. Inclosure 2 in No. 93. Review of the Fur Seal Fisheries of the World in 1887, by A. Howard Clark. IN the " Encyclopaedia Britannica," ninth edition, the fur seal fisheries are credited with an annual yield of 185,000 skins, of which 100,000 are said to be obtained from the Pribyloff Islands, 30,0 JO from the Commander Islands, 15,000 from the Straits of Juan de Fuca and vicinity, 12,000 from the Lobos Islands, 15,000 from Patagonia and outlying islands, 500 from the Falkland Islands, 10,000 from the Cape of Good Hope and places thereabout, and 2,500 from islands belonging to Japan. The above statistics were communicated by me to the author of the article | Seal 175 Fisheries " in the gjj Encyclopaedia," and had been carefully verified b} the latest official records and by a personal interview with Messrs. C. M. Lampson and Co., of London, one of the principal fur houses of the world, and by whom most of the annual production of fur seal-skins are placed upon the market. A review of the subject at this time (January 1888) necessitates but a slight change in the annual production and in the apportionment to the several fisheries. Some of the fisheries have increased, while others have decreased. Taking the average annual yield from 1880 to date, I find that the total production is now 192,457 skins, obtained as follows :— Annual Yield of Fur Seal Fisheries. Pribyloff Islands, Behring's Sea .. .. .. .. .. Commander Islands and Robben Reef .. .. .. .. Islands belonging to Japan .. .. .. .. .. British and American sealing fleets on north-west coast of America (including catch at Cape Flattery and Behring's Sea) .. .. .. Lobos Islands at mouth of Rio de la Plata .. .. .. .. Cape of Good Hope (including islands in Southern Indian Ocean) Cape Horn region .. .. .. .. .. .. Falkland Islands .. .. .. .. Total lumber of r Seal Skins. 94,967 41,898 4,000 25,000 12,385 5,500 8,162 550 192,457 The Statistics for the Pribyloff and Commander Islands are compiled from Reports of the Alaska Commercial Company, Mr. Elliott's Reports in Vol. viii, 10th Census, and in Section 5, United States' Fish Commission Report, and Trade Reports of annual sales in London ("Fur Trade Review," published monthly at No. 11, Bond Street, New York). The north-west coast statistics are from the annual Reports of the Department of Fisheries of Canada, and from Mr. Swan's Report in Section 5, vol. ii, of the quarto report of the United States' Fish Commission. For Japan, Lobos Islands, Cape of Good Hope, and Falkland Islands the statistics are from the " Annual Statements of the Trade of the United Kingdom with Foreign Countries and British Possessions as presented to Parliament." Statistics for Cape Horn region are from sealing merchants of Stonington and New London, Connecticut. The details of the fisheries for a series of years are shown in the following Table. (As to the number of persons employed, it is not possible to give details in all cases. At Pribyloff Islands, in 1880, there were 372 Aleuts and 18 whites. At Commander Islands there are about 300 persons. In the North-west coast fishery 523 Indian hunters and 100 whites, and in the Cape Horn fishery about 400 whites, of whom, perhaps, 300 are Chileans.) Number of Fur Seal Skins from Principal Fisheries: 1871 to 1887. (Compiled from official sources by A. H. Clark. No returns for spaces blank.) X o a Cm a O CO o .X 1 es (—1 —I O 3 CO rg Year. To SfcS o .2 3 5-° aS CO o 13 . a •ft CO o o O a an 1 n & O O CD £ O 3 & O >-& u o ti £ 1871 63,000 3,614 « 1872 99,000 29,319 1> go ^ 1873 99,630 30,396 1 1874 99,820 31,272 • rt do 1,085 Soo" 7,954 9,393 1875 99,500 36,274 <S;j3 100 St-1" 2,243 8,629 1876 99,000 26,960 4, aa 6fio 173 tz m to 6,618 11,225 1877 85,000 21,532 2 © 55 © 1,386 -- t- 22,550 11,065 1878 95,000 31,340 %M 2,366 rc 11,931 13,086 1879 99,968 42,752 18,500 OS a 3 4,038 6,900 15,128 1880 99,950 48,504 19,150 2,427 9,275 10,900 1 7.731 1881 85,000 42,640 c 620 6,610 8,887 8,280 1882 99,800 46,000 17,700* < 50 8,600 15,067 11,497 1883 78,000 25,000 11,943 8 13,950 1 7,020 1884 99,500 38,000 15,641* 684 03 f^J 10,722 ! 3,924 1885 99,600 42,000 15,000* 5 o •£ 11,223 4,407 1886 98,000 45,000 38,907* 3,695 68 P3 P 15,949 3,378 1887 99,890 48,000 29,211f Catch landed at British Columbia vessels. Mostly taken in Behring's Sea. See Schedule (A). s^ EES 176 The second point upon which information is requested is "that of the destruction f the fur seal, resulting either in its extermination or the diminution of its yield in places where it formerly abounded," &c. At the beginning of the present century there were great rookeries of fur seal at Falkland Islands, at the South Shetlands, at Masafuera, at South Georgia, and at many other places throughout the Antarctic region. These places were visited by sealing-vessels, and indiscriminate slaughter of the animals resulted in the extermination of the species, or in such diminution in their numbers that the fishery became unprofitable. The details of the Antarctic, fishery are given in Section 5, vol. ii, of the quarto Report of the United States' Fish Commission, pp. 400-467 ; in Report by H. W. Elliott on "Seal Islands of Alaska," 6, pp. 117-124 (reprinted in vol. viii, 10th Census Reports); in "Monograph of North American.Pinnipeds," by J. A. Allen (Misc. Pub., xii, United States' Geological Survey) ; in | Fanuing's Voyages Round the World " (New York, 1833) j in " Narrative of Voyages and Travels in Northern and Southern Hemispheres," by Amasa Delano (Boston, 1817)-J and in numerous other works, to which reference will be found in the above volumes. A few men are still living who participated in the Antarctic seal fisheries years ago. Their stories of tbe former abundance of fur seals I have obtained in personal interviews. As to the manner of destruction there is but one thing to say : an indiscriminate slaughter of old and young, male and female, in a few years results in tbe breaking up of the largest rookeries, and, as in the case of Masafuera and the Falkland Islands, the injury seems to be a permanent one. As an instance, the South Shetlands were first visited in 1819, when fur seals were very abundant; two vessels in a short time securing full fares. In 1820 thirty vessels hastened to the islands, and in a few weeks obtained upwards of 250,000 skins, while thousands of seals were killed and lost. In 1821-22 Weddell* says : 1320,000 skins were taken The system of extermination was practised, for whenever a seal reached the beach, of whatever denomination, he was immediately killed and his skin taken; and by this means, at the end of the second year, the animals became nearly extinct. The young, having lost their mothers when only three or four days old, of course died, which, at the lowest calculation, exceeded 100,000." In subsequent years, until 1845, these islands were occasionally visited by vessels in search of seal-skins, but never after 1822 were many animals found there. About 1845 the Antarctic fur-sealing was abandoned. In 1871 the industry was renewed, and a few vessels secured some valuable furs from the South Shetlands, but in a few years voyages there became unprofitable. (See sec. 5, vol. ii, United States' Fish Commission Report, pp. 402-458.) The same story may be told of Masafuera, from which island about 3,500,000 fur seal-skins were taken between the years 1793 and 1807. (See sec. 5, as above, p. 407.) Captain Morrell states that in 1807 | the business was scarcely worth following at Masafuera, and in 1824 the island, like its neighbour Juan Fernandez, was almost entirely abandoned by these animals." (Morrell's Voyage: New York, .1832, p. 130.) Scarcely any seals have since been found at Masafuera. Delano states that in 1797 there were two or three million fur seals on that island, j Elliott, in his Report already cited, gives accounts of earlier voyages to Masafuera, &c. I have consulted log-books and journals of several voyages, all agreeing in the former abundance, and the extermination of the fur seal on Masafuera" as well as on other Antarctic or southern islands. At the Falkland Islands both fur seals and sea-lions abounded, but there, too, they were destroyed. The sealing business at South Georgia was most prosperous in 1800, during which season sixteen American and English vessels took 112,000 fur seal-skins. Though not as important a rookery as some of the other islands, considerable numbers of fur seals have been taken from South Georgia. Since 1870 some good cargoes of elephant seal oil have been taken there. Fur seals were abundant at the Tristan d'Acunha Islands at the beginning of the century, and because of the almost inaccessible caves and rocks to which they resort a few have survived—or, at least, as late as 1873 a few were annually taken there. On the West coast of Africa, from the Cape of Good Hope to the 16th degree of south latitude, there was until 1870 a considerable number of fur seals of an inferior quality, but they are now practically exhausted, the few skins marketed as coming from there being taken on various hauling grounds on islets farther south and east. (See sec. 5, vol. ii, United States' Fish Commission Report, p. 415.) The Prince Edward group, Crozet Islands, Kerguelen Land, and other smaller islands in the Southern Indian and Southern Pacific Oceans, were important seal fisheries both for * " VVeddell's Voyages," p. 130, quoted in Section V, vol. ii, quarto Report of United States' Fish Commission, n.407. 177 the fur and elephant seal. At none of them is any number of seals found to-day. the English exploring ship "Challenger" visited Kerguelen Land in 1873-76, and reports:— " Two of the whaling schooners met with at the island killed over seventy fur seals in one day, and upwards of twenty at another, at some small islands off Howe Islands to the north. It is a pity that some discretion is not exercised in killing the animals, as is done at St. Paul Island, in Behring's Sea, in the case of the northern fur seal. By killing the young males and selecting certain animals only for killing, the number of seals even may be increased ; the sealers in Kerguelen Island kill all they can find." (See " Report of the Scientific Results of the Exploring Voyage of Her Majesty's ship * Challenger,' 1873-76. Narrative of the Cruise. Vol. i, in two parts. 4to. Published by order of Her Majesty's Government, 1885.") In these volumes will be found similar references to other seal islands visited by the ' Challenger." In referring to Marion Island the Report says:— " The ruthless manner in which fur and elephant seals were destroyed by the sealing parties in the early part of this century has had the effect of almost exterminating the colony that used these desolate islands for breeding purposes." (Vol. i, p. 294.) To recapitulate : concerning seal rookeries south of the equator, I may say that there is no single place where any number are now known to resort except on the Lobos Islands, off Peru, and at tbe mouth of the Rio de la Plata, and on the neighbouring hauling grounds at the cliffs of Cabo Corrientes. Here they are, and have long been, protected by the Argentine Republic or Uruguay, and the rookery appears to remain about the same size, with little apparent increase or decrease in the number of animals, as may be seen by statistics of the catch in the Table above given. |pji The small rookeries or hauling grounds at Diego Ramirez Islands, Cape Horn, and the rocky islets in that vicinity, from 1870 to 1883 or 1884 yielded some return to the hardy sealers of Stonington and New London, Connecticut, from which ports a half-dozen vessels have been annually sent. Even this last resort of American sealers is practically exhausted, and only by much search is a profitable voyage made there. Dr. Coppinger, who was at Cape Horn in 1878-82 ("Cruise of the 'Alert,'" by R. W. Coppinger: London, 1883), tells of the difficulties of sealing at Cape-Horn, and of the profits made when even a few skins are secured. In 1880 Captain Temple " came through the western channels of Patagonia, having entered the straits at Tres Montes;" and on the Cavadonga group of barren rocks he says he found some thousands of seals. Had the great southern rookeries been protected by Government, it is altogether probable, according to all authorities, that they would to-day yield many thousands of skins, in some cases equal to the valuable returns of the Pribyloff Group. In proceeding up the Southern Pacific from Masafuera we pass St. Felix, the Lobos Islands, off Peru, and the Galapagos Islands, on which, as well as on other islands in that ocean, the fur seal once was found, but whence it has been exterminated. North of the equator we meet, first, the Guadaloupe Islands, where in 1878 there were a few fur seals, presumably migrations from the Pribyloff Group. Moving northward, along the Califor- nian and north-west coast, the fur seal is found in winter and early spring on its way to the great breeding grounds on the Pribyloff Islands. It is during'this migration that the Pacific sealing-schooners of British Columbia and San Francisco capture them, and it is probable that if the fleet increases in size, with a corresponding increase in the number of seals taken, there will ere long be an appreciable decrease in the number of seals on tbe Pribyloff Islands. This cannot but be the result, for many seals are killed and not secured, and there is the same indiscriminate slaughter as regards young and old, male and female, that was practised at the southern rookeries. The statistics showing the present growing condition of the north-west coast fishery, and the efforts of the fishermen to follow the seals even into Behring's Sea, are already a matter of record, and need not be repeated here, except to refer to the Annual Reports of the Department of Fisheries of Canada. In the Report for 1886 will be found (on p. 249_) the names of the British Columbian fleet, aggregating 20 vessels, manned by 79 sailors and 380 hunters, and their catch is given at 38,917 skins, as compared with 13 vessels, taking 17,700 skins, in 1882. The American vessels in this fleet in 1880 and their catch is .given by Mr. Swan in sec. 5, vol. ii, of the quarto Report of the United States' Fish Commission. .It is not necessary that I refer to the condition of the rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands. There can be no question concerning the advisability of regulating the number of animals to be.killed, and the selection of such animals as will not interfere with the breeding of the species. The history of the islands at the beginning of the century, when there was an indiscriminate slaughter of fur seals, and the protection of the animals in 1808 and thereafter by the Russian and American Governments, is fully told by Veniaminov and by Ellictt, and nped not be repeated here. (Veniaminov's " Zapieskie," [128] 2 A &c, St. Petersburgh, 1842, vol. ii, p. 568, quoted by H. W. Elliott in " Seal Islands of Alaska," pp. 140-145, vol. viii, Tenth Census Report.) The Commander Islands (Behring and Copper Islands), in Behring's Sea, and Robben Reef, near Saghalien, in the Okhotsk Sea, are leased by the Alaska Commercial Company, and are protected by the Russian Government in much the same manner that the Pribyloff Islands are protected by the United States' Government. A description of the seal industry on those islands is given by Professor Nordenskiold in " Voyage of the Vega," a translation of a portion of his Report being given by Mr. Elliott on pp. 109-115 in " Seal Islands of Alaska." At Robben Reef it is impossible to establish a station, the rock being often wave-washed ; but the Alaska Company send men there in the season, to gather from 1,500 to 4,000 skins each year. The agent of the Russian Government confers with the Alaska Company's agent each year to determine the number of skins that shall be taken in the Commander Islands. The seals taken by the Japanese are those migrating from the Commander Group, and are not secured in large numbers, the average being about 4,000, though some years as many as 11,000 are taken. Schedule (A.)—Memorandum of Seal-skin Seizures, Vessels, &c, in Behring's Sea, in 1887. No. Rig. Name. Nation. Tonnage. Captain. Owner. Seized. Date. Seals. 1 Steam schooner W. P. Sayward .. British .. 59 Geo. R. Terry .. J. D. Warren •• Revenue steamer "Rush" July 10 477 2 Ditto .. Anne Beck .. 36 Louis Olsen •. ft 9> ,. 3 336 3 Ditto Grace .. .. 76 Wm. Petit „ 18 769 4 Ditto Dolphin ,. „ 70 J. D. Warren ,. ,, •» fi 13 618 5 Schooner . Alfred Adams •. 68 W. W. Dyer .. J. Guteman • • 1> ., Aug. 12 1,379 6 Ditto Ada Lottie Fairfield*. " " 65 J. Gandin •. J. Boskowitz .. Lynde A. Hough. Steamer "Bear" „ "Rush" » 25 1,876 7 Ditto Challenger •, American. 36 H. B. Jones .. A. Douglass .. » 5 443 8 Ditto LiiyL. ,, ,. 63 J.W.Todd G. W. Ladd .. July 1 151 9 Ditto Annie.. £ 25 H.Brown Jas. Laflin .. a „ „ 25 195 10 Ditto Kate and Annie,. 16 Chas. Lurjen •• Chas. Lurjen .. Aug. 11 304 11 Ditto .. Ellun .. -..■*■ 12 T. H. Wentworth G. VV. Lybyjust.. l» 9J „ 12 577 12 Ditto Alpha.. ., » *• 26 Jus. Talten. •• Jas. Talten J. V. Garvin •. *> >> „ 12 „ 12 195 389 13 Ditto .. San Jose .. »» •• 51 J. S. Lee •. J.S.Lee J. D. Griffin .. 19 >1 „ 23 891 11 Ditto Angel Dolly I .. 18 A. Tulles 9J * • G. R. Tingle, Treas. Agent P 5 178 15 Ditto .. Allie T.Alger .. 70 C. E. Ravnor •. . . Steamer "Bear" „ 25 1,594 16 Ditto Sylvia Handy .. 68 J. L. Cathcut .. Ii. N. Handy and Son ft 31 Sept. 2 1,597 11,969 * Vessel not captured. Aerival of Sealing Schooners from Behring's Sea in 1887, as far as reported to October 5, 1887. Recapitulation, as reported up to October 5, 1887— Skins seized .. ., .. Skins landed .. .. Arrived at— Name of Schooner, Number of Skins. Port Tow asend . Lottie .. 700 Victoria . . „ Mary Tavlor . + . 1,00U • • • • • • Pathfinder.. . . . 2,300 » ■ • • • • • Penelope .. . • . • 1,500 • • «• Black Diamond , . , , 595 • * • • Mountain Chief , . . 700 • • . # Lottie Fairfield , . 2,997 » * * « • •» Adel . . &J& , , 1,350 ■ • • • • • Favorite .. • • 1 i 1,887 . • • Teresa « . 0 1,246 j) • • • • • • Triumph ,. . * , 480 • • • City of San Diego ■ • l , 1,187 » Vauderbilt.. 1,300 17,242 11,969 17,242 Total 29,211 179 Inclo8are3 in No. 93. Mr. Elliott to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., December 3, 1887. DURING the course of my extended studies of the fur-seal on its breeding and hauling grounds in Behring's Sea, I was led naturallv into-a very careful examination of the subject of its protection and perpetuation. This investigation caused me to give much attention then to the effect which pelagic sealing would have upon the well-being and the conservation of these anomalous and valuable interests of our Government as we view them upon the Pribyloff group. When preparing, in 1881, a final arrangement of my field notes and memoranda for publication in my Monograph of tbe Seal Islands of Alaska (10th Census U. S. A.), the late Professor Baird suggested that I omit the discussion of this theme of pelagic sealing, because it might serve to invite an attack which otherwise would never be made upon these preserves of our Government, This attack, however, has recently been made, and the thought occurs to me now that a brief epitome of my study of the effect which this plan of sealing will have upon the integrity and value of our fur-bearing interests in Behring's Sea—that such a brief, yet accurate, statement will be of service to you. I therefore venture to present the following transcript. It is now well understood and unquestioned— 1. That the fur-seal of Alaska is obliged to haul out annually upon the Pribyloff Islands for the purpose of breeding and shedding its pelage. 2. That from the time of its departure from these islands in the autumn of every year up to the time of its return to them in the following spring it lands nowhere else. 3. That it arrives en masse upon these islands in June and July, and departs from them in October and November. 4. That when leaving the islands in the fall it heads directly for, and rapidly passes out from Behring's Sea into, the waters of the North Pacific Ocean. Its paths of travel are bee-lines from the Pribyloff group to and through the numerous passes of the Aleutian Archipelago; the passes of Oonimak, Akootan, Oonalga, Oomnak, and the Four Mountains are most favoured by it. 5. That it returns from the broad wastes of the North Pacific Ocean by these same paths of departure. Therefore, if you will glance at the Map of Alaska, you will observe that the convergence and divergence of these watery paths of the fur-seal in Behring's Sea to and from the Seal Islands resembles the spread of the spokes of a half-wheel—the Aleutian chain forms the felloe, while the hub into which these spokes enter is the small Pribyloff group. Thus you can see that as these watery paths of the fur-seal converge in Behring's Sea they, in so doing, rapidly and solidly mass together thousands and tens of thousands of widely scattered animals (as they travel) at points 50 and even 100 miles distant from the rookeries of the Seal Islands. Here is the location and the opportunity of the pelagic sealer. Here is bis chance to lie at anchor over the shallow bed of Behring's Sea, 50 and 100 miles distant from the Pribyloff group, where he has the best holding ground known to sailors, and where he can ride at any weather safely swinging to his cable and in no danger from a lee shore if it should slip. The immediate vicinity, however, of the Aleutian passes is dangerous in the extreme to him. There he encounters terrible tide-rips, swift currents, and furious gales formed through the entrances, with the very worst of rough, rocky, holding ground. But up here, anywhere from 3 to 100 miles south of the Seal Islands, in Behring's Sea, in that watery road of the returning fur-seal millions, he has a safe and fine location from which to shoot, to spear, and to net these fur-bearing amphibians, and where he can work the most complete ruin in a very short time. His power for destruction is still further augmented by the fact that those seals which are most liable to meet his eye and aim are female fur-seals, which, heavy with young, are here slowly nearing the land, reluctant to haul out of the cool water until the day and hour arrives that limits the period of their gestation. The pelagic sealer employs three agencies with which to secure his quarry, viz.: He sends out Indians with canoes and spears from his vessel; he uses rifle and ball, shot-guns and buck-shot; and last, but most deadly and destructive of all, he spreads the I gill-net" in favourable weather. [128] 2 A 2 Ifrl 180 With gill-nets, under run by a fleet 01 sealers in Behring's Sea, across these converging paths of the fur-seal, anywhere from 3 to 100 miles southerly from the Seal Islands, I am extremely moderate in saying that such a fleet could and would utterly ruin the fur-seal rookeries of the Pribyloff Islands in less time than three or four short seasons. If these men were unchecked every foot of that watery area of fur-seal travel in Behring's Sea above indicated could and would be traversed by these deadly nets, and a seal would scarcely have one chance in ten to safely pass such a cordon in attempting to go and return from its breeding haunts. Open these waters of Behring's Sea to unchecked pelagic sealing, then a fleet of hundreds of vessels—steamers, ships, schooners, and what not—M'ould immediately venture into them, bent upon tbe most vigorous and indiscriminate slaughter of these animals. A few seasons then of the greediest rapine, then nothing left of those wonderful and valuable interests of the public which are now so handsomely embodied on the Seal Islands. Guarded and conserved as they are to-day, they will last for an indefinite time to come, objects of the highest commercial value and good to the world, and subjects for the most fascinating biological study. It is also well to note the fact- that not an eligible acre of land is barred out from settlement or any other fit use by our people, and not a league of water is closed to any legitimate trade or commerce in all Alaska by this action of our Government in thus protecting the fur-bearing rookeries of the Pribyloff group. Such are the facts in this connection. They are indisputable. No intelligent unselfish man will advocate for a moment the policy of destruction in this instance; he never will if fully aware of the facts bearing on the question. There are only two parties in this controversy. The party of destruction demands the full right to unchecked pelagic sealing in Behring's Sea, while the party of preservation demands the suppression of that sealing. Comment is unnecessary. Very truly, &c. (Signed) HENRY W. ELLIOTT. No. 94. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received February 21.) My Lord, Washington, February 10, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith an article from the "New York Herald" on the Behring's Sea seizures and closed seas. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 94. Extract from the "New York Herald " of February 8, 1888. Closeo Seas.—An Ottawa despatch states that Professor Dawson is on the way to Washington, as agent of the Canadian Government, in relation to complaints of that Government about wrongs suffered by some of its people in Alaska. This refers probably to the seizure of a number of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea and their condemnation at Sitka. The "Carolina," "Onward," and "Thornton," all confessedly Canadian sealers, were seized in August 1886 by an American Revenue-cutter, while over 60 miles from land, in Behring's Sea, and were later condemned by the United States' Court. About the same time several American sealing-vessels—the " San Diego," " Sierra," and others—were also seized, under similar circumstances, and also condemned. Early in 1887 the President ordered the discontinuance of the proceedings against the Canadian sealers and their discharge, but the American vesssels captured and condemned -were held. Subsequently, in July 1887, five other Canadian sealers—the "Grace," " Dolphin," " Alfred Adams," | W. P. Sayward," and " Anna Beck "—were seized, also at a distance from land. For all these seizures, and the losses inflicted on the owners and crews, damages are claimed by the British Government. In considering these claims, the question whether the United States can hold Behring's Sea to be a closed sea turns up. We suppose that if it were not for a desire to preserve the valuable fur seal fisheries this question would not be raised, because Behring's Sea, geographically, is plainly an integral part of the Pacific Ocean. Russia, when she owned both shores of it, may have »nmttB ■HimaCT*v*tAiw«gwwCTi awwiimw 181 claimed it as a closed se&; just as Spain once claimed the exclusive right to navigate the whole Pacific Ocean. But in modern times such claims have been considered preposterous, and have been shelved. Our own Government has been in the past most persistent in its opposition to "the headland " theory, and to the assertion by other Powers of exclusive rights to waters much more closely land-bound than the Behring's Sea. The United States were the first to resist the claims of the Barbary Powers to attribute for entering the Mediterranean. Our Government resisted the payment of the " Sound dues" to Denmark as "inconsistent with just principles of international law," and asserted "the freedom of the Baltic Sound," and "insisted on the right of free transit into and from the Baltic." Later, the United States even refused to acknowledge the right of Turkey to exclude our vessels from tbe Black Sea, and we have always refused to acknowledge Great Britain's claim to make the Gulf of St. Lawrence a closed water. We do not suppose, therefore, that the Government will defend the seizure of the Canadian sealers on the ground that it can prevent foreign ships from entering Behring's Sea, or from fishing or sealing in it beyond 3 miles from the shore. That northern extension of tbe Pacific Ocean is, it seems to us, undoubtedly an open sea, in which all nations may freely sail and fish, keeping outside the 3-mile limit. The preservation of the seal fisheries is, of. course, of interest to the Government, which draws a revenue from these fisheries sufficient, we believe, to pay the interest on the cost of Alaska. It has often been urged that, if any one may capture seals in the Behring's Sea, the animals will soon become extinct. So the Canadians represent that if our mackerel fishers are allowed to use the Gulf of St. Lawrence, the mackerel fishery there will be destroyed for the Canadians, the American seines destroying, as they allege, the young fish. We have not noticed that much attention has been paid here to this plea of the Canadians. Perhaps, if our fishermen will agree not to fish in Canadian waters, the Canadians will agree not to seal in Behring's Sea? Meantime, there is a bill of damages on each side; for the Canadians have dealt with great severity, not to say brutality, with our fishermen in their waters. No. 95. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, February 22, 1888. I TRANSMIT herewith, for your information, a copy of a letter from the United States' Minister in London,* inclosing a copy of a despatch addressed to him by Mr. Bayard on the 7th instant, in which attention is called to the necessity for the adoption Of measures for the protection of the fur-seals in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 96. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. (Extract.) Foreign Office, February 22, 1888. jjj THE United States' Minister called to-day at the Foreign Office, and spoke to me about the question of the protection of the fur seals in Behring's Sea. He said that the difficulties in regard to the seal fisheries in that sea were mainly connected with the question of the close time, and that no attempt had been made by the authorities of the United States to stop the fishing there of any vessels at the time when it was legitimate. Mr. Phelps then made a proposal on the bases embodied in Mr. Bayard's despatch of the 7th February, a copy of which accompanies my previous despatch of this day's date.f Mr. Bayard there expresses the opinion that the only way of preventing the destruction of the seals would be by concentrated action on the part of the United States, Great Britain, and other interested Powers to prevent their citizens or subjects from killing * No. 93. f See No. 93. wm 1S2 fur seals with fire-arms or other destructive weapons north of 50° of north latitude, and between 160° of longitude west and 170° of longitude east from Greenwich, during the period intervening between the 15th April and the 1st November. I expressed to Mr. Phelps the entire readiness of Her Majesty's Government to join in an Agreement with Russia and the United States to establish a close time for seal»fishing north of some latitude to be fixed. No. 97. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, March 3, 1888. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit herewith, for the information of Secretary Sir H. Holland, a cooy of a letter from the United States' Minister in London,* inclosing a copy of a despatch addressed to him by Mr. Bayard on the 7th ultimo, in which attention is called to the necessity for the adoption of measures for protecting the fur seals in Behring's Sea. I am at the same time to inclose a copy of a despatch which has been addressed to Sir L. West,f repeating tbe substance of what passed at an interview between Lord Salisbury and Mr. Phelps on this question on the 22nd ultimo. I am to request that in laying these papers before Sir H. Holland, you will move him to furnish Lord Salisbury with any observations he may have to offer on the subject. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 98. The Marquis of Salisbury to M. de Staal. My dear Ambassador, Foreign Office, March 3, 1888. I INFORMED you a short time ago that the Government of the United States had proposed negotiations with the object of regulating the catching of fur seals in Behring's Sea. It would be a source of satisfaction to me if the Russian Government would authorize your Excellency to enter into a discussion of the matter with Mr. Phelps and myself, and I should be greatly obliged if you would communicate on the subject with M. de Giers and inform me of the decision at which his Excellency may arrive. I have, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 99. M. de Staal to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 8.) Cher-Lord Salisbury, Londres, le 24 Fe'vrier (7 Mars), 1888. J' AI eu l'honneur de recevoir la lettre que vous avez bien voulu m'adresser en date du 3 Mars au sujet de la proposition faite par le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amerique en vue du reglement de la question de la chasse aux phoques dans la mer de Behring. Votre ExceUence m'ayant fait part du d^sir du Gouvernement de Sa Majesty Britannique de voir la Russie concourir aux arrangements a concerter pour preserver de la mine une branche d'industrie importante, je m'empresserai d'en informer le Gouvernement Imperial en priant M. de Giers de me munir des instructions neces- saires pour le cas ou le Ministere Imperial m'autoriserait a m'associer aux negotiations sur l'objet en question. Yeuillez, &c. (Signe) STAAL. * No. 93. t No. 96. 183 (Translation.) Dear Lord Salisbury, London, Februury 24 (March 7), 1888. I HA YE had the honour to receive the letter which yon were good enough to address to me on the 3rd March respecting the proposal made by the Government of the United States of America with, the object of settling the question of seal-hunting in Behring's Sea. •Your Excellency having acquainted me of the desire of Her Britannic Majesty's Government to have the co-operation of Russia in the arrangements to be concerted for the preservation from ruin of an important branch of industry, I shall lose no time in informing the Imperial Government, and I shall ask M. de Giers to furnish me with the necessary instructions in case the Imperial Government should authorize me to take part in the negotiations on the subject in question. Receive, &c. (Signed) STAAL. No. 100. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 13.) Sir, Downing Street, March 12, 1888. IN reply to your letter of the 3rd instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to acquaint you, for«the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, that he thinks it wiU be necessary to consult the Canadian Government on the proposal to establish a close time for seals in Behring's Sea before expressing a final opinion upon it. A copy of your letter and its inclosure has been forwarded to the Governor-General with a view to obtaining an expression of the views of his Ministers upon it. I am to add that Lord Knutsford is inclined to view the proposal of the United States' Government with favour, but that he presumes that it will be made quite clear, should Her Majesty's Government assent to it, that such assent will not be taken as an admission of the claims of the United States in Behring's Sea, which have formed and still form the subject of controversy. (Signed) I am, &c. JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 101. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, March 17, 1888. ' I HA YE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 12th instant, relative to the proposals of the United States' Government for the establishment of a close season for the fur-bearing seals which frequent Behring's Sea. , By his Lordship's direction I transmit herewith for your information copies of the correspondence, marked in the margin,* which has recently passed on this subject.; and I am to request that in laying these papers before Lord Knutsford you will call his attention to the instructions given to Sir L. West to inform the United States' Secretary of State that, in acting upon the invitation conveyed in Mr. Bayard's despatch to Mr. Phelps of the 7th ultimo, Her Majesty's Government do not admit the rights of jurisdiction exercised by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea during the fishing seasons of 1886-87 and 1887-88, and that the presentation of claims on account of the wrongful seizures of British vessels engaged in the seal-fishing industry will not be affected by such action. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 184 No. 102. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, March 17, 1888. SINCE forwarding to you my despatch of the 22nd ultimo I have been in communication with the Russian Ambassador at this Court, and have invited his Excellency to ascertain whether his Government .would authorize him to discuss with Mr. Phelps and myself the suggestion made by. Mr. Bayard in his despatch of the 7th February, that concerted action should be taken by the United States, Great Britain, and other interested Powers, in order to preserve from extermination the fur seals which at certain seasons are found in Behring's Sea. Copies of the correspondence on this question which has passed between M. de Staal and myself is inclosed herewith.* I request that you will inform Mr. Bayard of the steps which have been taken, with a view to the initiation of negotiations for an Agreement between the three Powers principally concerned in the maintenance of the seal fisheries. But in so doing, you should state that this action on the part of Her Majesty's Government must not be taken as an admission of the rights of jurisdiction in Behring's Sea exercised there by the United States' authorities during the fishing seasons of 1886-87 and 1887-88, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty's Government will have to present on account of the wrongful seizures which have taken place of British vessels engaged in the seal-fishing industry. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 103. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 22.) Sir, Downing Street, March 22, 1888. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a notice of a question to be asked in the House of Commons on Monday next by Mr. Gourley, respecting the alleged clearing for Behring's Sea of Canadian sealing schooners with armed Indian crews for the purpose of waging war upon American Revenue cutters, should their commanders attempt to molest them. The question also asks what measures Her Majesty's Government intend adopting for the purpose of arriving at an amicable solution of the Alaskan Fisheries disputes. Lord Knutsford has telegraphed to the Governor-General of Canada to inquire into the truth of the report referred to in the question, but he would be glad if the Marquis of Salisbury would inform him of the answer which should be returned to that part of the question which relates to the measures to be adopted for a settlement of the Alaskan Fisheries dispute. Lord Knutsford would also be glad to receive Lord Salisbury's opinion as to whether it would be legally justifiable, and, if so, advisable, to desire the commanders of Her Majesty's ships to disarm any British sealing schooners sailing with such intention as is alleged in the report. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure in No. 103. Question to be asked in the House of Commons, March 26, 1888. Mr. Gourley,—To ask the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether it is correct, as reported by cable from Victoria, British Columbia, that a number of Canadian sealing -schooners have been permitted to clear for Behring's Sea with the intention of prosecuting seal-fishing contrary to the regulations of the United States' Alaskan authorities, carrying large Indian crews for the purpose of waging war upon American Revenue cutters, should their commanders attempt to molest them. And what measures Her Majesty's Government intend adopting for the purpose of arriving at an amicable solution of the Alaskan Fisheries disputes. Nos. 98 and 99. 185 No. 104. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, March 24,1888. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 22nd instant, calling attention to a notice of a question to be asked by Mr. Gourley in the House of Commons on the 26th instant (I) in regard to tbe alleged clearing for Behring's Sea of certain Canadian sealing schooners with armed Indian crews, for the purpose of waging war upon American Revenue cutters, should the commanders of the latter attempt to molest them ; and (2) as to the measures which Her Majesty's Government intend to adopt for arriving at an amicable solution of the Alaskan Fisheries disputes. With reference to the latter part of Mr. Gourley's question, I am to request that you will state to Lord Knutsford that, although some delay is inevitable in pressing for an immediate settlement of the questions which have arisen between this country and the United States in connection with the fur-seal fisheries in Behring's Sea, there is no reason to believe that any further illegal seizures of British vessels will take place, especially as the United States' Government have invited Her Majesty's Government to negotiate a Convention for a close time, thereby admitting their claim to exclusive rights in those waters to be untenable. Lord Salisbury, however, will again endeavour to obtain assurances on the subject from the Government of the United States. As regards the rumours which have reached this country by telegraph from Victoria, British Columbia, of the clearance of Canadian vessels for Behring's Sea, manned with armed Indian crews, I am to state that Lord Salisbury will be prepared to submit the matter to the Law Officers of the Crown, should the rumours in question be confirmed, but that if the vessels are armed, not for purposes of attack, but for purposes of resistance to illegal seizures on the high seas, it would seem difficult to justify any interference with them on the part of Her Majesty's cruizers. In conclusion, I am to suggest, for Lord Knutsford's consideration, that, in reply to Mr. Gourley's inquiry as to " what measures Her Majesty's Government intend adopting for the purpose,of arriving at an amicable solution of the Alaskan Fisheries disputes," it might be stated that the question is now under the consideration of the two Governments concerned, but that it would be premature at this moment to say more than that Her Majesty's Government have no reason to doubt that a satisfactory arrangement will be arrived at. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 105. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 26.) Sir, Downing Street, March 24, 1888. WITH reference to my letter of yesterday's date respecting a question to be asked jn the House of Commons upon the subject of the alleged clearance of Canadian sealing vessels for the Behring's Sea with armed Indian crews, I am directed by Lord Knutsford ^to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram which has this day been received from the Governor-General of Canada. I am to request to be informed of the answer which Lord Salisbury would wish to be returned to the GoVernor-General"hi regard to the latter part of his telegram. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 105. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) Ottawa, March 22, 1888. I HAVE received your telegram of the 22nd. The press has published rumour referred to, but it is not credited here, or confirmed by information, private or official. It is, however, of great importance, in order to avoid injury to fishing interest and risk [128] 2 B 1:bU;1. 186 of further complications, to obtain from United States' Government explicit statement of its intentions as to sealers found in Behring's Sea this season. No. 106. Count Piper to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 27.) EN se reYerant a la note verbale en date du 11 Octobre dernier, par laquelle M. le Marquis de Salisbury a exprime' le desir de connaitre si le Gouvernement du Roi accepterait l'invitation qui lui avait et6 adressee par le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis a entrer dans un arrangement concernant la peche aux phoques dans la mer de Behring, le Comte Piper a l'honneur, d'ordre de son Gouvernement, de lui communiquer ci-joint la reponse que le Comte Ehrensvard a fait parvenir a ce sujet au Ministre des Etats-Unis a Stockholm. Lovdres, le 24 Mars, 1888. (Translation.) WITH reference to the note verbale of the 11th October last, in which the Marquis of Salisbury expressed the wish to know if the King's Government would accept the invitation addressed to them by that of the United States to come to an arrangement concerning the seal fishery in Behring's Sea, Count Piper has the honour, by order of his Government, to communicate to Lord Salisbury the inclosed reply which Count Ehrensvard has addressed to the United States' Minister at Stockholm on the subject. London, March 24, 1888. Inclosure in No. 106. Count Ehrensvard to the United States' Minister at Stockholm. Le 15 Mars, 1888. PAR une lettre en date du 17 Septembre de l'ann6e passee Vous avez bien voulu, au nom de Votre Gouvernement, inviter les Royaumes-Unis a entrer dans un arrangement avec les Etats-Unis pour la preservation des phoques dans la mer de Behring. La chasse aux phoques dans ces parages n'elant, jusqu'a present, que d'un interet minime pour les Royaumes-Unis, le Gouvernement de Roi a cru ne pas devoir prendre part activement a ces pourparlers, lesquels il suivra toutefois avec toute l'attention que merite 1'affaire. II sera ainsi heureux d'apprendre que les pourparlers engages entre les Puissances interessees en premiere ligne a ce sujet aient pu aboutir a un arrangement international, et que la faculte" d'adhe"rer a l'entente serait, le cas echeant, reservee aux autres Puissances. Veuillez, &c. (Signe*) EHRENSVARD. (Translation.) March 16, 1888. IN a letter dated the 17th September of last year You were good enough, in the name of Your Government, to invite the United Kingdoms to enter into an arrangement with the United States for the preservation of seals in Behring's Sea. As the hunting of seals in those regions is at present but of very slight interest to the United Kingdoms, the Government of the King have not thought it their duty to take an active part in these negotiations, though they will be" glad to follow them with all the attention which the matter deserves. They will also be glad to learn that the negotiations between the Powers chiefly interested have successfully resulted in an international arrangement, and that liberty will be reserved to the other Powers to join in such an arrangement should they desire to do so. Receive, &c. (Signed) EHRENSVARD. 187 No. 107. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 29.) Sir, Downing Street, March 28, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 24th instant, and to yours of the same date, relating to the alleged cleaning for Behring's Sea of certain Canadian. sealing schooners with armed Indian crews, for the purpose of resisting the American Revenue cutters, should the commanders of the latter attempt to molest them, I am- directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a telegram received from the Governor-General of Canada, from which it appears- that' this rumour is not unfounded. Lord Knutsford desires to call the attention of Lord Salisbury to the suggestion of the Governor-General that the Admiralty should instruct the Admiral commanding on the station to watch the proceedings on the spot. His Lordship would also suggest that this matter should be brought under the immediate notice of the United States' Government in order that a definite announcement of their intentions during the present season with reference to the Behring's Sea sealers may be obtained; with such information Her Majesty's Government would be better able to consider how further complications may best be avoided. I am, &c. (Signed) EDWARD WINGFIELD. Inclosure in No. 107. Lord Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) Ottawa, March 27, 1* I AM informed by Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia that sealers on the point of departure for Behring's Sea are arming the vessels and crews to resist capture by American Revenue cutters. We think it desirable that Admiral should be instructed to watch proceedings on the spot. I have telegraphed to Lieutenant-Governor to issue notice cautioning sealers to refrain from any assertion of right by force of arms, and pointing out grave results which might ensue from resort to arms whilst negotiations still in progress. It seems to us impossible to prevent fishermen taking on board the arms and ammunition usually required for their own protection and for use in seal-fishing. Reports reach us from. Victoria that United States' Government has issued orders for the seizure of all sealers found this season in Behring's Sea. Let me again urge necessity of obtaining from United States' Government definite announcement of its intentions during present fishing season in those waters. No. 108. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, March 30, 1888. I INCLOSE, for. your information, a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office,* inclosing a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, from which it appears that the British vessels and crews now fitting out for the approaching seal-fishing season in Behring's Sea are being armed with a view to offering resistance to their capture by American cruizers when so occupied. Lord Lansdowne also reports that it is rumoured in Victoria that orders have been issued by the United States' Government for the seizure of all sealers found this season in Behring's Sea. I request that you will inform Mr. Bayard of the report in question, and that yon'will earnestly represent to him the extreme importance that Her Majesty's Government should be enabled to contradict it. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. p28j * No. 107. 2 B 2 amst'iam 188 No. 109. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, March 30, 1888. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 28th instant, inclosing a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, from which it appears that the vessels and crews now preparing for the seal-fishing season in Behring's Sea are being armed with a view to offering resistance to their capture in that sea. I am to request that you will inform Lord Knutsford, in reply, that Sir L. West has been instructed to call Mr. Bayard's attention to the rumour current in Victoria that orders have been issued by the United States' Government to capture British ships fishing in Behring's Sea, and he has been further directed to represent earnestly the extreme importance that Her Majesty's Government should be enabled to contradict the rumour in question. On receipt of Sir L. West's reply a further communication will be addressed to you. I am, (Signed) &c. JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 110. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 2.) My Lord, Washington, March 19, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a telegram which I have received from Mr. Foster, the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, as well as copy of a despatch which I have addressed to the Marquis of Lansdowne in reply thereto, and which is based on unofficial communication with the State Department. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No. 110. Mr. Foster to Sir L. West. (Telegraphic.) Ottawa, March 6, 1888. IT seems that Canadian sealers are required to carry appeal to United States' Court, or, by failure to do that, will forfeit bonds. Can they be allowed, pending definite settlement between United States and Great Britain, to bond vessels and skins without obligation to appeal ? Inclosure 2 in No. 110. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Lansdowne. {Extract.) Washington, March 19, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Excellency herewith copy of a telegram which I have received from Mr. Foster, your Excellency's Minister of Marine and Fisheries, relative to pending proceedings in the cases of Canadian sealers seized in Behring's Sea, and, in reply, to inform your Excellency that the Attorney-General has stated that Rule X of the Practice in Admiralty and Rules of the Supreme Court (1887) make it plain that the confiscated ships can be bonded pending appeal. No. 111. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, ^ Foreign Office, April 3,1888. THE United States' Minister called upon me to-day, previous to his return to America. He was anxious to speak to me especially with reference to the condition of the seal-fishery in Behring's Sea. I aw™«a«M»JMM.MWiOT 189 He expressed the hope that instructions would soon arrive which would enable the Russian Ambassador to negotiate on the subject of establishing a close time during which the capture of seals in certain localities should not be permitted; and he added that, whenever that Convention could be arranged, it would put an end to all the difficulties which had arisen with respect to the seal-fishery in that sea. Mr. Phelps was very anxious for dispatch because the destruction of the species was enormous, and was increasing in volume every year. But under the peculiar political circumstances of America at this moment, with a general election impending, it would, he said, be of little use, and, indeed, hardly practicable, to conduct any negotiation to its issue before the election had taken place. He held it, however, to be of great importance that no steps should be neglected that could be taken for the purpose of rendering the negotiation easier to conclude, or for supplying the place of it until the conclusion was obtained. He informed me, therefore, unofficially, that he had received from Mr. Bayard a private letter, from which he read to me a passage to the following effect:— " I shall advise that secret instructions be given to American cruizers not to molest British ships in Behring's Sea at a distance from the shore, and this on the ground that the negotiations for the establishment of a close time are going on." But, Mr. Phelps added, there is every reason that this step should not become public, as it might give encouragement to the destruction of seals that is taking place. I suggested to him that it would be desirable for Lord Lansdowne to know of it, as his Excellency was much embarrassed by the measures for self-defence which were being taken by some of the sealing-ships that were fitting out from British Columbia. Mr. Phelps then said that he would have no objection to my communicating this information to Lord Lansdowne confidentially. At the same time he expressed the hope that I would represent to Lord Lansdowne the importance of refusing clearance, if he could do so, to all ships going out from ports in British Columbia to shoot seals in Behring's Sea during close time, that is to say, from the 15th April to the 1st November. He also said he presumed that any Convention for exercising police in Behring's Sea' must, in the case of America and Great Britain, be supported by legislation ; and he would be very glad if Her Majesty's Government would try to obtain the requisite powers during the present Session. I replied that the matter should have our immediate attention. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 112. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 4.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, April 3, 1888. I HAVE made representation to Secretary of State as directed in your telegram of the 30th ultimo. He begs me to inform your Lordship that no orders have been issued for capture of British ships fishing in Behring's Sea. No. 113. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, April 5, 1888. WITH reference to your letter of the 2Stb ultimo, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state to you, for tbe information of Secretary Lord Knutsford, that a telegram has been received from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington reporting that the United States' Secretary of State has informed him that no orders have been issued by the Government of the United States for the capture of British ships fishing in Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Behring's 190 No. 114. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 11.) Sir, Downing Street, April 10, 1888. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, an extract of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the question of bonding the British sealing-vessels captured by the United States' cruizers in Behring's Sea during last season, and again urging the desirability of obtaining from the Government of the United States a distinct intimation of its intentions with regard to the approaching season. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 114. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Extract.) Government House, Ottawa, March 21, 1888. I AM given to understand by my Minister of Marine and Fisheries that permission has actually been given to the owners of the British vessels to bond them pending appeal, provided that the sureties are citizens of the United States and resident therein. He has, however, learnt that the British Columbian owners who are concerned in this matter are not willing to bond their vessels if they are thereby bound to carry an appeal to the United States' Courts, and if, by not proceeding with the appeal, they would thereby forfeit their bonds. It has, moreover, been suggested that, by giving bonds pending an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, the owners might thereby place the matter outside the scope of any diplomatic negotiations which may take place upon this subject, a result which they would naturally be desirous of avoiding. They have now inquired whether it would be possible for them to bond their vessels, &c, pending, not an appeal to the Supreme Court, but the diplomatic settlement of the question which has arisen in connection with the seal fishery in these waters. I shall be glad if Her Majesty's Government will invite the attention of that of- the United States to this request, which should be attended to as soon as possible. From information which I have received, there is reason to believe that the seal-skins on board of these vessels will be sold at Sitka on the 19th April. . In connection with the subject of this despatch, I venture again to call your attention to the inquiry made in my telegram of the 31st March, 1887, in regard to the action likely to be taken during the present year by cruizers of the United States in Behring's Sea against sealers frequenting these waters. The uncertainty as to this has had a very prejudicial effect upon the fishing interests of British Columbia, and I would urge that, both in order to avoid this inconvenience, and also in order to obviate the risk of further friction between the two Governments, an explicit statement of its intentions should be obtained from that of the United States with as little delay as possible. It is, I think, obvious that an international arrangement whereby a close time would be established for fur-seals within certain limits is not likely to be arrived at in time to provide for the requirements of the fishing season of this year. I have communicated a copy of this despatch to Sir Lionel West. 191 No. 116. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, April 14, 1888. I LAID before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 10th instant, together with the despatch from the Marquis of Lansdowne therein inclosed, respecting the bonding of British sealing-vessels captured by United States' cruizers in Behring's Sea during last season, and again urging the desirability of obtaining from the United States' Government a distinct intimation of their intentions with regard to the approaching season. On this latter point my other letter of this day will have made known to the Secretary of State for the Colonies Lord Salisbury's views. With regard to the question of "the bonding for appeal vessels or cargoes condemned to forfeiture by the District Court of Alaska," I am directed by Lord Salisbury to observe that the arrangement proposed in paragraph 5 of Lord Lansdowne's despatch would operate as an abandonment of the right of appeal without any certain prospect of a remedy by diplomatic action. His Lordship would therefore suggest, for the consideration of Lord Knutsford, whether it might not be preferable to propose to the United States' Government that the time limited for the prosecution of the appeals should be extended by consent for such period as may allow of a settlement by diplomatic negotiation, without prejudice to the ultimate legal remedy by appeal, should such negotiation be unsuccessful. As regards the sureties, Lord Salisbury does not think that reasonable objection can be taken to the stipulation that they should be citizens of the United States and resident therein, and therefore within the jurisdiction of the American Courts. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 117. Sir L, West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 16.) My Lord, Washington, March 27, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copies of a letter addressed to Senator Dolph, of Oregon, by Mr. James G. Swan, Assistant Collector of Port Townsend, Washington Territory, relative to fur-seals in the waters of Alaska and in the Behring's Sea. The migration of the New England fishermen to the Pacific coast, and their deters mination to assert the rigjht to fish or hunt in the American waters of Behring's Sea> outside of 3 nautical miles from any island or the mainland of Alaska, will have an important bearing on the jurisdiction claimed by the United States' for the benefit of the Alaska Commercial Company. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 117. 50th Congress.—Senate.—Mis. Doc. No. 78. In tiii; Senate oe the United States. March 15, 1888.—Presented by Mr. Dolph, and ordered to lie on the table and be printed. letter of James G. Swan, Assistant Collector, Port Townsend, Washington Territory, relative to Fur Seals in the Waters of Alaska and in the Behring's Sea. Senator, Port Townsend, Washington, March 7, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inform you of the arrival here of the first vessel of the Gloucester, Massachusetts, fishing fleet—the schooner "Mollie Adams," Captain Johnson, Tssr 192 which arrived here on the 3rd instant. This vessel is owned by Captain Solomon Jacobs, of Gloucester, who has taken command of her, and she sails to-day on a sealing expedition from off the mouth of the Columbia, following the herd north. Seals are reported as being unusually numerous this season and are in myriads. California steamers report running through one herd which extended 100 miles, and the seals appeared to be as thick as they could swim. After the sealing season is over the schooner will engage in the halibut and cod fishery and send their catch in ice to ihe Eastern markets. Another of Captain Jacobs' schooners, the " Webster," will be here in April, and several others will be here this season. Next year between fifty and sixty vessels are expected, and they will be followed by others, and within two years a colony of several hundred of these fishermen will be here to develop the wealth now dormant and hidden in our waters. Since I returned from Queen Charlotte's Island, in 1883, I have persistently urged on Professor Baird the necessity of sending one of the United States' Fish Commission steamers to the Pacific to develop our fisheries, and shortly before Professor Baird's lamented death he wrote me that the " Albatross " would be sent to our waters, and she is now on her way out. These Gloucester fishermen will render valuable assistance to Captain Tanner. It is to the fishermen of Gloucester, Cape Cod, and the coast of Maine that the United States' Fish Commission is largely indebted for much of the valuable information respecting the Atlantic fisheries, which has been published by that admirable Bureau of the Smithsonian Institution. Hitherto no protection has been given our Pacific fishermen by our Government. The Treaty of 1818 does not allude to the Pacific coast, nor does the present Treaty, so far as 1 am informed, make any provision for or allusion to the fisheries of the North Pacific. British Columbia is, as it were, sandwiched between Washington and Alaska ; our interests are identical, and at present the most harmonious and kindly feeling exists between the people of British Columbia and ourselves. Every steamer for Alaska which takes the inside passage passes through the waters of British Columbia, affording a means of delightful recreation to thousands of tourists. This kindly feeling should be encouraged, and particularly in reference to our fishermen who wish to fish the waters of the coast from the Columbia to Alaska. But these New England fishermen ask more than to fish along the coast; they wish to explore the waters of Behring's Sea and the Arctic Ocean, and to be permitted to take any of the products of the ocean in American waters without the annoyance they have been subjected to for so many years on the Canadian coasts of the Atlantic. Ever since the lease of the Pribylov Islands to the Alaska Commercial Company, that powerful monopoly has persistently deceived the Congress of the United States and the American people by arrogantly asserting that all the fin seals of the North Pacific Ocean congregate on the Islands of Saint Paul and St. George, and that the indiscriminate slaughter of those seals would soon exterminate the race. The latter part of this assertion is true, but the first, I assert, is a physical impossibility. The seals of the North Pacific, in countless myriads, could not, by any process of their own, find room on those two comparatively insignificant islands, and I am prepared to prove that the southern seals, from the Gulf of Tehuantepec and Gulf of California, which come north every season, differ from the seals of the Pribylov Islands, and never "haul out " on that group. The indiscriminate slaughter of fin seals in early days on the Island of Massafuero, on the coast of Chile, and on the San Benito Islands of Lower California, drove the seals away from those once famous rookeries, and they seem to have acquired new habits. A paid writer of the Company, Henry W. Elliott, in an otherwise excellent monograph on the fin seal islands of Alaska, boldly asserts that the seals of the North Pacific all congregate on the Pribylov Islands. He further asserts that those seals have their pups on land, and that if a pup is thrown into the water it cannot swim, but will sink like a stone, and takes me to task for asserting that the pups of the seals taken at Cape Flattery can swim as soon as born and even when taken alive from the mother's womb.* In 1883.1 was instructed by Professor Baird to investigate the habits of the fin seals and to make a Report thereon, which Report may be found in the Bulletin of the United States' Fish Commission (vol. iii, 1883, p. 201). In that Report I have shown by thirteen witnesses, some of them Government officials, that the fin seals of Cape Flattery do have their pups in the water, on the kelp and at other places not yet discovered, and that the pups swim as soon as born; this evidence as against Mr. Elliott's * United States' Commission of Fish and Fisheries, Special Bulletin 176, a \Tonojraph of the Seal Islands of Alaska, by Henry W. Elliott, 1882, p. 166, last paragraph. 193 unsupported, dogmatic assertion that the pups will sink like a stone. I believe that Mr. Elliott is correct so far as the seals of the Pribylov Islands are concerned, and I know that I am correct so far as regards the seals of Cape Flattery, and, believing that both of us are correct, it proves incontestably that the seals which come from the south to Cape Flattery differ in their habits from those of Behring's Sea. These eastern fishermen, knowing the value of the rookeries, are desirous that the law protecting the seals on the Pribylov Islands, as well as the provisions of the lease to the Alaska Commercial Company, should be rigidly enforced. But they do not believe that the term " adjacent waters " named in that lease ever meant or was intended to mean all the waters of the North Pacific Ocean. They believe that they, as American citizens, have a right to fish or hunt in the American waters of Behring's Sea, outside of 3 nautical miles from any island or the mainland of Alaska. They believe that William H. Seward did not purchase Alaska for the Alaska Commercial Company, but for the whole nation. These fishermen from New England demand as a right that they be permitted to pursue their honourable business in the American waters of the North Pacific, Behring's Sea, and the Arctic without being treated as criminals and hunted down and seized and imprisoned by the piratical Revenue cutters of the United States, at the diction and for the sole benefit of the Alaska Commercial Company. These fishermen already here, and the colonies which will be here next year with their fleets of schooners, are of vastly more importance to the American nation than the monopoly of the Alaska Commercial Company. And they have requested me to address you, Senator, and other Senators, respectfully asking you to kindly look into thi3 question, and have it ordered by the Treasury Department that American citizens can take any of the products of the ocean outside of 3 marine miles from any island in Behring's Sea or the coasts of the mainland of Alaska. Hitherto the outrageous arrogance and assumption of the Alaska Commercial Company has been only met by feeble protests from merchants of San Francisco and a few Portland traders. But now a new order of things is about being inaugurated. An intelligent and valuable class of New Epgland fishermen are coming here to reside among us and become citizens of Oregon, Washington, and Alaska. They know their rights as American citizens, and they are determined to have their rights. It is time that the farce played by the Alaska Commercial Company was ended, and that the sorry sight of American Revenue cutters hunting down our own citizens for the benefit of that huge monopoly should for ever cease. I have given this subject careful attention for many years, but have had no occasion to take any particular interest in it until now, and now is the time to speak and act. These determined, energetic fishermen of New England are here, and more coming. All they ask is their right as American citizens to hunt and fish in American waters outside 3 miles from land. Strictly enforce the law prohibiting the taking of seals on the Pribylov Islands ; strictly enforce the law prohibiting the introduction of spirits or firearms among Indians; but give the fishermen the right to develop the wealth in our waters, encourage them to make new discoveries, aid them in every legal manner to pursue their avocations, and they will prove a new source of wealth to our Pacific States, and add to our population a new and a most desirable element. I have had the honour, Senator, to address Senator Mitchell and Senator Stanford upon this important question, and if there are any points on which you would like further information, I shall esteem it an honour if you will address me, and I will give you all the information I possess. I want to see Behring's Sea and all American waters open to American fishermen, and I earnestly and respectfully solicit your kind consideration of the question. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. SWAN. The Hon- Joseph N. Dolph, Senator in Congress from Oregon. [128] 2 C 194 No. 118. ! Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 16.) My Lord, Washington, March 31, 1SSS. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's despatch of the 17th instant, and to inclose herewith copy of a note which I addressed to the Secretary of State in the sense of that despatch, as well as copy of the reply which I have received thereto. I have &c. (Signed) ' L.' S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No. 118. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, March 26, 1888. WITH reference to the proposed concerted action by Great Britain, the United States, and other interested Powers, in order to preserve from extermination the fur seals which at certain seasons are found in Behring's Sea, I am requested by the Marquis of Salisbury to inform you that the Russian Ambassador in London has been communicated with on the subject, and that he has referred to his Government for instructions. But in making this communication to you, I am instructed to state that this action on the part of Her Majesty's Government must not be taken as an admission of the rights of jurisdiction in Behring's Sea exercised there by the United States' authorities during the fishing seasons of 1886-87 and 1887-88, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty's Government will have to present on account of the wrongful seizures which have taken place of British vessels engaged in the seal-fishing industry. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 2 in No. 118. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, March 30, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 26th instant, in which you inform the Department that the action of Her Majesty's Government in respect to the proposal of this Government for an arrangement to protect the fur-seal from extermination in Behring's Sea is not to be taken as an admission of the jurisdiction of the United States over Behring's Sea, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty's Government will have to present on account of the seizure of certain British vessels in those waters. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 119. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 16.) My Lord, Washington, April 5, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 19th March, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a Memorandum sent to me by the lawyer engaged 195 in the case of certain seal-skins ordered to be sold at Sitka, from which your Lordship will perceive that the matter has been satisfactorily adjusted. I have communicated this Memorandum to the Marquis of Lansdowne. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 119. Memorandum by Mr. Benjamin. THE District Judge for Alaska having refused to admit British Columbian claimants to the privileges of the Attorney-General's Order of last December, prescribing that condemned sealing-vessels and cargoes might be released to their late owners, pending appeal, upon supersedeas bonds, with sureties, residing in Alaska, California, Oregon, or Washington Territory (said District Judge contending that the Order related only to the cases of American claimants), I laid before the Attorney-General, on the 31st ultimo, the case of the British owner of 1,400 seal-skins, ordered to be sold under Condemnation Decree at Sitka on the 18th instant, said owner having tendered a valid appeal bond with sureties, residing at San Francisco. To-day, during my attendance upon the Attorney-General, he sent a joint telegram to the District Judge and the District Attorney at Sitka, advising them that his Order^of last December was intended to apply to all claimants, irrespective of nationality. The telegram will go by mail from Port Townsend, and will reach Sitka before the day of sale in due course. The Attorney-General expressed his dissatisfaction with the course of the officers at Sitka in putting so narrow a construction upon the original Order. (Signed) CHARLES F. BENJAMIN, Counsellor-at-Law. Washington, April 4, 1888. No. 120. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 16.) My Lord, Washington, April 6, 1888. . WITH reference to your Lordship's despatch of the 30th March, I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of a note which I addressed to Mr. Bayard, representing the importance of enabling Her Majesty's Government to contradict the report that orders had been issued by the United States' Government for the capture of British ships fishing in Behring's Sea. I had previously received a communication in the above sense from the Marquis of Lansdowne, and at an interview which I had with the Secretary of State he stated to me that no such orders had been issued, which information I telegraphed to your Lordship on the 3rd instant. I have since received a further telegram from the Marquis of Lansdowne, copy of which is inclosed, requesting to know whether his Government is to understand that sealers will not be molested except within the marine league from the shore. I accordingly again called on Mr. Bayard, and he repeated to me, in reply to my question in the above sense, that no orders had been issued for the capture of sealers in Behring's Sea. He presumed that the orders I alluded to as having been issued some years ago were instructions under Statute (see 1,956 Revised Statutes) for the regulation of the seal fishery in the waters of Alaska. Pending international negotiations on this subject, he did not think it was expedient to answer my question in so far as it related to the marine league limit, as these negotiations had for object the general protection and preservation of the seal in all waters. He did not wish to see another British or American sealer seized, and hoped that no such seizures would occur. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. [128] 2 C 2 Bk^veui 196 Inclosure 1 in No. 120. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, April 2, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inform you that the Marquis of Salisbury has received intimation from the Canadian Government to the effect that orders have been issued by the United States' Government for the capture of British ships fishing in Behring's Sea, and that he has telegraphed to me to represent earnestly the extreme importance of enabling Her Majesty's Government to contradict this rumour. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 2 in No. 120. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir L. West. (Telegraphic.) April 5, 1888. IN reply to your telegram of the 3rd April, there is an impression here that orders were issued some years ago by United States' Government to Collector at San Francisco for seizure of vessels found in Behring's Sea, and that these orders have never been withdrawn. May we understand our sealers will not be molested except within the marine league from shore ? No. 121. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir R. Morier. * Sir, Foreign Office, April 16, 1888. THE Russian Ambassador and the United States' Charge* d'Affaires called upon me this afternoon to discuss the question of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea, which had been brought into prominence by the redent action of the United States. The United States' Government had expressed a desire that somcagreement should be arrived at between the three Governments for the purpose of prohibiting the slaughter of the seals during the time of breeding; and, at my request, M. de Staal had obtained instructions from his Government on that question. At this preliminary discussion it was decided provisionally, in order to furnish a basis for negotiation, and without definitively pledging our Governments, that the space to be covered by the proposed Convention should be the sea between America and Russia north of the 47th degree of latitude; that the close time should extend from the 15th April to the 1st November; that during that time the slaughter of all seals should be forbidden; and vessels engaged in it should be liable to seizure by the cruizers of any of the three Powers, and should be taken to the port of their own nationality for condemnation; that the traffic in arms, alcohol, and powder should be prohibited in all the islands of those seas; and that, as soon as the three Powers had concluded a Convention, they should join in submitting it for the assent of the other Maritime Powers of the northern seas. The United States' Charge d'Affaires was exceedingly earnest in pressing on us the importance of dispatch on account of the inconceivable slaughter that had been and was still going on in these seas. He stated that, in addition to the vast quantity brought to market, it was a common practice for those engaged in the trade to shoot all seals they might meet in the open sea, and that of these a great number sank, so that their skins could not be recovered. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. * Also to Sir L. West. XTSX*mmKm!Bx*EBBsBmK*rimiBmii 197 No. 122. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, April 17,1888. HER Majesty's Government have had under consideration the particulars received by them in regardto the claims of British sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea, and warned off by the United States' authorities. They consider that it would be difficult to arrive at a just estimate of the amount of the claims in question without an investigation by a Mixed Commission into the circumstances under which these claims have arisen, which require verification. I have accordingly to request you to ascertain whether the United States' Government would agree to the appointment of a Mixed Commission, whose functions should be restricted to inquiring whether any compensation is due, and, if so, how much in each case. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. T No. 123. Foreign Office to Colonial Office.* Sir, Foreign Office, April 20, 1888. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit to you a copy of a despatch which his Lordship has addressed to Her Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburgh and Her Majesty's Minister at Washington,! recording a conversation he has had with the Russian Ambassador and the United States' Charge d'Affaires at this Court, on the subject of the measures which might be adopted to check the indiscriminate slaughter of seals in Behring's Sea. . lam to request that, in laying the inclosed despatch before Her Majesty's Secretary of State for the Colonies, you will move him to favour Lord Salisbury with any observations he may have to offer upon the proposals discussed therein. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 124. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 21.) Sir, Downing Street, April 20, 1888. WITH reference to your letter of the 14th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, for any observations which he may have to offer, a copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the cases of the British sealers captured last year. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 124. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) April 18, 1888. IT seems very desirable time for appeal be extended as long as possible. United States' Government should, in the interim, release vessels and skins on security abide by conditions of negotiations. Owners would desire to appeal as last resort should negotiations fail. Also to Board of Trade and Admiraltv t No. 1:1 SBfi&« 198 No. 125. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 23.) My Lord, Washington, April 11, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 6th instant, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a private note which I have received from Mr. Bayard, repeating what he had told me on the 6th instant, that no orders had been I issued this year for the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea. I have forwarded copy of Mr. Bayard's note to the Marquis of Lansdowne. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 125. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Dear Sir Lionel, Department of State, Washington, April 10, 1888. REFERRING to our conversation held on the 6th instant in a personal interview in relation to the Treasury orders for the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' Revenue cutters, I now repeat, at your request, what I then told you in reply to the memorandum of inquiry by Lord Salisbury, that no orders on the subject referred to had been issued this year by the Treasury Department. Very truly yours, (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 126. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 24.) Downing Street, April 24, 1888. WITH reference to the previous correspondence relating to the seizure of British fishing-vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' cruizers, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a confidential despatch received from the Governor-General of Canada, inclosing copies of telegrams which have passed between his Lordship and the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia respecting the arming of sealing-vessels to resist capture by the United States' cruizers. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 126. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, March 29, 1888. I HAVE the honour to transmit, for your Lordship's information, copies of telegrams which I have received from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, dated the 27th and 29th instant, stating that the owners of sealing-vessels now on the point of departure for the Behring's Seaare arming their vessels and crews to resist capture by United States' cruisers. I also inclose a copy of my reply to the former of these telegrams. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 2 in No. 126. Lieutenant- Governor Nelson to the Marquis of Lansdowne. (Telegraphic.) Victoria, British Columbia, March 26, 1888. MY Government has received information that sealers, on point of departure for Behring's Sea, are arming their vessels and crews to resist capture. 199 Inclosure 3 in No. 126. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lieutenant-Governor Nelson. (Telegraphic.) Ottawa, March 27, 1888. IN reply to your telegram of the 26th, public notice should be issued by your Government, cautioning persons going on sealing expeditions to refrain from assertion of their rights by force, and from taking on board arms and ammunition in excess of their usual requirements. The whole matter forms the subject of diplomatic negotiations now in progress. Any intemperate action in the meanwhile would be most detrimental to British Columbian interests, and might lead to serious complications, and be followed by grave consequences. Inclosure 4 in No. 126. Lieutenant-Governor Nelson to the Marquis of Lansdowne. (Telegraphic.) Victoria, British Columbia, March 29, 1888. IT is reported that, with a view to protecting their vessels and property from lawless designs of United States' Government, some persons, fitting out here for sealing, are arming their vessels and crews, and unless protection is afforded by Imperial Government, serious loss of property, and possibly human life, may result. Dominion Government are therefore urged to take such steps for the protection of British interests in Behring's Sea as may be deemed advisable. No. 127. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received April 26.) Sir, Admiralty, April 25, 1888. MY Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty have had under their consideration your letter of the 20th instant, inclosing a copy of a despatch, dated the 16th instant, which has been addressed by Lord Salisbury to Her Majesty's Ambassador at St. Peters- hurgh and Her Majesty's Minister at Washington in regard to the adoption of •measures to check the indiscriminate slaughter of seals in Behring's Sea. 2. My Lords request that you will state to Lord Salisbury that their Lordships full concur in the views set forth in the inclosure to your letter now under reply. I am, &c. (Signed) EVAN MACGREGOR. No. 128. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 26.) Sir, Downing Street, April 25, 1888. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th instant, transmitting a copy of a despatch addressed to Her Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburgh respecting the proposed establishment of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea.* In reply, I am to inclose, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of the extender of a telegram which was sent to the Governor-General of Canada, on his Lordship's suggestion, inquiring whether the Dominion Government were aware of any objection to the proposed arrangement. I am also to inclose a copy of a despatch from Lord Lansdowne, in the two concluding paragraphs of which he points out that the probable effect of the proposed close time on the operations of the Canadian sealers would be to exclude them completely from the rights which they have until lately enjoyed without question or molestation. In these circumstances, it is probable that the United States' proposals may not be * No. 121. uintumimfii 1 TOO accepted by Canada without reserve, and Lord Knutsford would suggest that, pending the receipt of the observations of the Dominion Government in response to the invitation contained in his despatch of the 8th March, referred to by Lord Lansdowne, no final action should be taken in the matter. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 128. Lord Knutsford to the Marquis of Lansdowne. My Lord, Downing Street, April 21, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acquaint you that I have this day telegraphed to you, with reference to your despatch of the 9th instant, that negotiations are proceeding between Russia, the United States, and Great Britain with regard to the establishment of a close time, during which it would be unlawful to kill seals at sea, in any manner, to the north of the 47th parallel of latitude between the coasts of Russia and America, and inquired whether your Government was aware of any objection to the proposed arrangement. I added that, of course, as regards Canadian waters, Canadian legislation would be necessary. I have, &c. (Signed) KNUTSFORD. Inclosure 2 in No. 128. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Extract.) Government House, Ottawa, April 9, 1888. IN reference to my despatch of the 29th March, I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of a telegram, dated the 5th instant, from the Attorney-General of British Columbia to Sir John Macdonald, acquainting him that my telegram, of which a copy was sent to you in the above despatch, had been published in the provincial press as a warning to sealing-vessels, and that there was reason to believe that these vessels had, in consequence of tbe intimation thus given, ceased to arm themselves for the purpose of resisting the cruizers of the United States. I have forwarded to you by this mail copies of a telegram received from Sir L. West in reference to the probable action of these cruizers during the present season, and of a telegram addressed to him by me in reply. I observe that the information obtained by Sir Lionel West from Mr. Bayard, which is the same as that communicated to me in your telegraphic despatch of the 6th instant, is merely to the effect that no orders have been issued by the United States for the capture of British ships fishing in the Behring's Sea. I need scarcely point out that this is not equivalent to an assurance that such vessels will not be molested except when found within the 3-mile limit, and that we are not informed whether any orders which have been already issued in this connection arc or arc not still in force. I need scarcely point out that the close time for seals, referred to in your telegram, is created under a Statute of the United States, which is not obligatory except upon the subjects of that Power. The proposal contained in the inclosure to your Confidential despatch of the 8th March, 1888, for the adoption of a similar close season by British fishermen is at present receiving the careful consideration of my Government. Such a close time could obviously not be imposed upon our fishermen without notice or without a fuller discussion than it has yet undergone. You are aware that, during the close time enforced by the United States' Statute, the seals, although protected from slaughter by the use of firearms, may be killed in great numbers on their breeding-grounds by the persons who enjoy the monopoly of the trade under Concessions from the United States' Government, The rest of the year these animals are, according to Mr. Bayard's statement in his despatch of the 7th February, 1888, "supposed to spend in the open sea south of the Aleutian Islands," where they are probably widely scattered and difficult to find. It would appear to follow that, if concurrent regulations based upon the American Law were to be adopted by Great Britain and the United States, the privileges enjoyed by the citizens of the latter Power would be little if at all curtailed, while British fishermen Jg^S^lgBgBaSgBMISgiSBg Hrnmw»Twwn.^M»awCTinstimn^. iqwwwwwBMi.wCT^.f^mm 201 would find themselves completely excluded from the rights which until lately they have enjoyed without question or molestation. In making this observation I do not desire to intimate that my Government would be averse to entering into a reasonable agreement for protecting the far-bearing animals of the Pacific coast from extermination, but merely that a one-sided restriction such as that which appeared to be suggested in your telegram could not be suddenly and arbitrarily enforced by my Government upon the fishermen or this country. I have, &c. (Signed) LANSDOWNE. Inclosure 3 in No. 128. Mr. J. Robson to Sir J. Macdonald. (Telegraphic.) Victoria, April 5, 1888. . AS a warning, Lord Lansdowne's telegram to Lieutenant-Governor was published on 29th ultimo, and, I believe, arming has been discontinued, but to avert serious trouble assurance of protection continues [?] essential. No. 129. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—Received April 28.) Sir, Downing Street, April 27, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 25th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, explaining the views of the Dominion Government with regard to the establishment of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. Lord Knutsford woidd be glad to know what reply, if any, Lord Salisbury thinks should be sent. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 129. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) (Received at the Colonial Office, April 25, 1888, 10-10 P.M.) IF proved to be necessary, Canadian Government will be ready to join other Governments in adopting steps to prevent extermination of fur-seals in Northern Pacific Ocean, but, before final agreement, desires full information and opportunity for considering operation of proposed close time. Establishment of close time at sea only would give virtual monopoly of seal fisheries to Russia and United States; the latter Power owns the most important breeding places, in which close time would not operate. Rights should he reserved for Canada of terminating arrangement after sufficient notice, not exceeding two years. No. 130. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.-^-(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, \ Foreign Office, April 29, 1888. WITH reference to Lord Lansdowne's despatch of the 21st March,* respecting the Behring's Sea question, a copy "of which was forwarded to you by his Excellency, I have to request that you will propose to the United States' Government that the limit of time fixed for the prosecution of the appeals in regard to the seizures of British [128] '* See No. 114. 2 D BBgMB^j | 202 sealing-vessels should be extended by consent for such a period as may allow of the claims in question being settled by diplomatic negotiation without prejudice to the ultimate legal remedy by appeal if such negotiation should not be successful. You should also propose that the vessels and skins should be in the meanwhile at once released on security. The stipulation made by the American Court that the sureties should be American citizens resident in the States is objected to by some of the Canadian defendants, but this condition appears to me to be reasonable. am &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 131. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 30.) My Lord, Washington, April 19, 1888. UPON the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 17th instant I addressed a note verbale to Mr. Bayard, copy of which is inclosed, in order to ascertain whether the United States' Government would agree to a Commission to inquire into the claims of British sealing-vessels seized and warned off by the Udited States' authorities in Behring's Sea. I handed this note myself to Mr. Bayard, who read it, and remarked that from what had passed in the Fisheries Conference he had been led to believe that these claims would be held over. He would, however, answer my communication. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 131. Note Verbale. HER Majesty's Government have just received the particulars of the claims for compensation on account of British sealers seized and warned off by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea. A just assessment of these claims appears to them difficult, without investigation and verification, and they therefore wish to ascertain whether the United States' Government would be disposed to agree to a Commission which should he restricted to inquiring in each case whether compensation is due, and the amount of such compensation. Washington, April 18, 1888. No. 132. Board of Trade to Foreign Office,—(Received May 5.) Sir, Board of Trade, London, May 4, 1888. I AM directed by the Board of Trade to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 20th ultimo, in which you transmit copy of a despatch addressed by the Marquis of Salisbury to Her Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburgh and Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, recording a conversation which his Lordship has had with the Russian Ambassador and the United States' Charge" d'Affaires at this Court on the subject of adopting measures with a view to check the indiscriminate slaughter of seals in Behring's Sea. With reference to the concluding paragraph of your letter, I am to request that you will state to Lord Salisbury that the Board of Trade have no information to enable them to speak with confidence on the subject, but that, so far as they are in a position to judge, they would be disposed to regard favourably the proposals indicated by you as a basis for negotiation, and which contemplate restrictions partly in analogy with those already constituting a close time for the seal fishery of the Greenland Sea, where, however, the valuable fur-seals for which the Behring's Sea is noted are not found. At the same time, it may be supposed that the Western British Colonies in North ^B^p3S*T-^«Tffrew^wwgg«;a^^ samiiwwtwui^w«amnww™«mtfitfflrii 208 America would be interested in the matter, and they might be prepared to criticize the proposals in question for reasons with which this Department is not acquainted. I have, &c. (Signed) HENRY G. CALCRAFT. No. 133. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 14.) My Lord, Washington, April 22, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 19th instant, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith a copy of a note verbale which I have received in reply to the one which I addressed to Mr. Bayard, copy of which was inclosed in that despatch, stating that, in the cases of British vessels seized m Behring's Sea, it is preferable to await the judgment of the Appellate Court in the premises. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 133. Note Verbale. RESPONDING to the note verbale of Sir L. West, dated the 18th instant, it is suggested, on behalf of the United States, that, as the cases of seizure of British sealing- vessels in Behring's Sea therein referred to are now in Court pending an appeal from a judicial decision, it is preferable to await the judgment of the Appellate Court in the premises. Washington, April 21, 1888. No. 134. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 14.) My Lord, Washington, May 1, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 29th ultimo, and to inclose to your Lordship herewith a copy of a note which I addressed to the Secretary of State, in the sense conveyed therein, on the subject of the cases of British vessels seized in Behring's Sea, upon which appeals are pending. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 134. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, April 30, 1888. WITH reference to pending legal proceedings in the cases of British vessels seized by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to inform you that I am instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury to propose to the United States' Government that the time limited for the prosecution of the appeals in these cases should, by consent, be extended for such a period as may permit of a settlement of the claims in question by diplomatic negotiation, without prejudice to the ultimate legal remedy by appeal, should such negotiation be unsuccessful, and that the vessels and skins should be at once released on security. It is understood, indeed, that permission has actually been given to the owners of these vessels to bond, them pending appeal, provided the sureties are citizens of the United States and resident therein, and, under these circumstances, the proposal for an extension of the time limited for such appeal is submitted in view of any diplomatic negotiations which may ensue, having for object the satisfactory adjustment of all matters connected with these cases. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. [128] 2 D 2 204 No. 135. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received May 14.) Sir, Downing Street, May 12, 1888. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you a copy of the telegram which was addressed to the Governor-General of Canada upon the question of the proposed close time for seals in Behring's Sea, together with a copy of the reply which has now been received from the Governor-General, and which I am to request may be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury. I am, Sec. (Signed) EDWARD WINGFIELD, Inclosure 1 in No. 136. Lord Knutsford to the Marquis of Lansdoume. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, May 9, 1888. BEHRING'S SEA close time for seals. With reference to your telegram 25th April, would objections of your Government be met if proposal to take 50th degree north latitude be reverted to instead of 47th ? Inclosure 2 in No. 135. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) May 11, 1888. I HAVE received your cablegram of the 9th instant. The objections of the Canadian Government would not be removed by the substitution of the 60th instead of the 47th parallel. A Report on close time question is in course of preparation. My Government hopes that no decision will be taken until you are in possession of it. No. 136. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 11.) (Extract.) Washington, May 30, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 1st instant, I have the honour to inform your Lordship that at Mr. Bayard's request I called upon him, and he then remarked to me, with reference to my note of the 30th April, that he was not aware that there were any vessels or skins held at the present moment. With regard to extending the time limited for appeal, he said that he had consulted with the Attorney-General, and that he had found that it was not in the power of the Executive to intervene in the matter. Having given me this explanation, he said he would reply to my note in this sense. P.S.—I subjoin copy of the reply to my note of the 30th April, which I have just received. Inclosure in No. 136. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, May 28, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge your notes of the 30th ultimo and the 25th instant, both relating to the appeals taken in the Judicial Courts in Alaska from decrees in cases of British vessels seized by the United States' Revenue officials in Behring's Sea, under charges of having violated the laws of the United States regulating the killing of fur-seals. I must excuse myself for the delay in making reply to your note of the 30th April, which was caused by my desire to obtain from you a verbal explanation of what appeared to me an inadvertent expression contained therein, from which it appeared that the " skippers " were held under arrest as well as the sealing-vessels. In my personal interview with you to-day it became mutually understood that there vimwwDMBBHiminimwMroM 205 has been and is no such personal detention in any of the cases, hut the proceedings have all been in rem against the vessels so employed and their outfits. The suggestion of the Marquis of Salisbury that the time limited for prosecution of the appeals (entered already or proposed to be entered) in the cases referred to, in order to give an opportunity for a diplomatic settlement [sic], will meet with favourable consideration within the limits of statutory provision in relation to the docketing and prosecution of appeals. While it is not within the power of the Executive Branch to alter or extend the statutory limitation in respect of the time of entering such appeals, yet as far as agreement of both parties may prevail in procuring postponements of the arguments and pleadings, after the appeal has been duly taken, I apprehend that there will be every disposition on the part of the prosecution to give time for diplomatic arrangement. Accept, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 137, Extract from Russian Memorandum regarding Hunting of Seals.—(Communicated by M. de Staal to the Marquis of Salisbury, July 25, 1888.) LES endroits ou se pratique la chasse aux otaries peuvent se diviser en deux groupes distincts:— Nombre des Otaries tuees en 1885. Le premier groupe comprendrait— Les lies Pribyloff dans la Mer de Behring ,. .. Les lies du Commandeur (les lies de Behring et de Cuivre) .. L'lle des Phoques (Mer Okhotsk).. .. .. Le deuxi&me groupe— La mer pres des cotes de Victoria .. .. .. Lobas .. .. .. .. .. Les iles pres du Cap Horn et la Mer Polaire du Sud.. .. Le Cap de Bonne-Esperance .. .. .. Les lies Japonaises .. .. .. .. .. 100,000 45,000 4,000 149,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 7,000 57,000 I Dans le premier groupe le nombre des otaries tuees tous les ans est de beaucoup plus important que dans le deuxieme groupe La chasse s'y pratique sur des bases rationnelles, e'est-a-dire qu'on n'y tue que les otaries qui repondent aux exigences du commerce: d'une certaine taille et du sexe male et a l'epoque de l'annee oil la fourrure a le plus de valeur commerciale. En outre, la chasse s'y regie de facon que le nombre des otaries qui fre*quentent ces iles, loin de diminuer, augmente tous les ans. Dans le deuxieme groupe, la chasse a lieu sans aucun systeme; on y tue les otaries males et femelles de tout age sans tenir compte des epoques de l'annee. Ce mode d'extermination et le manque de lois protectrices font craindre la disparition complete des otaries de ces parages. Conime preuve on cite des endroits appartenant a ce deuxieme groupe oh jadis on trouvait des millions de ces phocaces et ou maintenant on en tue a peine quelques milliers. La periode qui suivit l'expiratiou de la Concession accorded a la Compagnie Russo- A.mericaine pour Sexploitation de la chasse sur les Iles Pribyloff et du Commandeur a clairement demontr6 tout le mal qu'une chasse libre pourrait faire au developpement et a la multiplication des otaries. Apres l'expiration de cette Concession les iles devinrent la proie du premier venu et les chiffres qui suivent deniontrent la progression enorme qu'a subi le nombre des otaries exterminees pendant ces deux annees:— En 1867, le nombre des otaries tuees sur les Isles Pribyloff etait de 40,000; en 1868, de 242,000 ; et en 1869, de 87,000. Sur les lies du Commandeur on avait tue* l'annee 1867, 4,000 otaries; l'annee 1868, 12,000; l'annee 1869, 21,000; et l'annee 1870, 27,000. 206 Ce n'est que l'eloignement de ces iles des contrees habitees et le nombre minime de la population locale qui a emp^che" la destruction complete de ces phocaces. Pour mettre fin a ces abus, le Gouvernement des Etats-Unis d'Amerique conc^da en 1870 a la Compagnie de Commerce d'Aliaska le droit d'exploiter la chasse des otaries sur les Iles Pribyloff pendant vingt ans. La meme Compagnie, mais sous un autre nom, obtint une autorisation analogue du Gouvernement Russe pour la chasse des otaries sur les Isles du Commandeur et des Phoques, pour la meme periode de vingt ans, a partir du 18 Fevrier, 1871. Ainsi, nous voyons qu'un monopole prive a etc- conceded sur les iles frequentees par les otaries trois ans a. peine apres l'expiration de celui de la Compagnie Russo- Americaine. Ce monopole a et6 reconnu necessaire pour les deux Gouvernements h la suite des conclusions des Commissions. Russe et Arniricaine, institutes dans le but d'etudier la question de la chasse aux otaries et le moyen de preserver ces animaux d'une destruction complete. D'apres le Contrat par le Gouvernement Russe, le nombre des otaries que la Compagnie a le droit de tuer est regie" chaque ann^e par les autorites Russes locales. La chasse ne peut etre pratique que par les indigenes, excepts sur l'He des Phoques, ou la Compagnie peut employer ses propres chasseurs, l'lle n'etant pas habitue. En e'change de chaque peau la Compagnie doit payer aux indigenes un certain prix prevu par le Contrat. L'epoque de la chasse est strictement limited. Ce qui fait le plus de tort au developpement du nombre des otaries c'est la chasse illicite qui se pratique tant en pleine mer que sur les Des Japonaises et quelquefois sur l'lle des Phoques apres le depart du batiment de la Compagnie, ce qui arrive generale- ment vers la mi-Octobre. D'apres les Rapports des Douanes Japonaises il a ete imports au Japon, pendant l'annee 1884, 3,400 peaux d'otaries resultant de ce genre de braconnage; ce qui ferait 50 pour cent sur toutes les fourrures d'otaries exportees du Japon. Jusqu'a 1862 il n'existait pas dans ce pays de loi prohibant la chasse des otaries. En 1862 une Loi defendant cette chasse a e"te promulguee sans effet, les iles n'etant pas suffisamment gardees contre l'invasion des braconniers. En automne les otaries quittent la terre ferme et se diligent au sud des lies Aleoutes, ou elles sejournent le reste de l'annee en pleine mer. C'est alors qu'elles sont exposees aux attaques des navires armes en chasse qui les detruisent par tous les moyens: armes a feu, filets, harpons, &c, sans distinction entre les males et les fern elles pleines. II n'y a qu'un tiers seulement des animaux tues de la sorte qui est utilise^ le reste se perd sans le moindre profit. C'est a ce genre de procede qu'on attribue la disparition a peu pres complete des otaries sur les c6tes du Chili et de l'Afrique Meridionale, ainsi que sur les Iles de Falkland. On a peur que le meme sort ne soit reserve" aux iles de.la Mer de Behring, a moins que des mesures efficaces ne soient adoptees k bref delai pour proteger les otaries. (Translation.) THE places where fur-seal hunting takes place can be divided into two distinct groups:— The first group would include— The Pribyloff Islands in Behring's Sea The Commander Islands (Behring and Copper Islands) The Seal Islands (Sea of Okhotsk) The second group— The sea adjoining the coasts of Victoria Lobas .. .. .. .. The islands near Cape Horn and the South Polar Sea The Cape of Good Hope .. .. .. The Japanese Islands Number of Fur-Seals killed in 1885. 100,000 45,000 4,000 149,000 20,000 15,000 10,000 5,000 7,000 57,000 ^jflreaygiCTiWtgKMH^^SggS'g^^ 207 In the first group the number of fur-seals killed annually is much larger than in the second group. Hunting is conducted on rational bases, i.e., that only such fur-seals are killed as are useful for commercial purposes, seals of a certain size, of the male sex, and at a time of year when the fur has the most commercial value. In addition, the hunting is regulated in such a way that the number of fur-seals which frequent the islands, far from diminishing, increases every year. In the second group hunting is carried on under no system. Male and female fur-seals of every age are killed, without regard to the season of the year. In consequence of this destructive method, and the absence of protective laws, the complete disappearance of the fur-seals from these shores is to be apprehended. As a proof, it is stated that millions of fur-seals were found formerly in places in the second group where but a few thousands are killed now. The period which followed the expiration of the Concession accorded to the Russo- American Company for hunting on the Pribyloff and Commander Islands clearly showed the injurious effect of unrestricted hunting on the development and multiplication of fur-seals. After the expiration of this Concession the islands became a prey to the first comer, and the following figures show the enormous increase in the number of fur-seals exterminated during these two years :— In 1867 the number of fur-seals killed on the Pribyloff Islands was 40,000 ; in 1868, 242,000; and in 1869, 87,000. On the Commander Islands 4,000 fur-seals were killed in 1867; 12,000 in 1868; 21,000 in 1869 ; and 27,000 in 1870. The complete extermination of the seal species was only prevented by the distance of these islands from inhabited countries, and the limited numbers of the local population. To put an end to these abuses the United States' Government conceded, in 1870, to the Commercial Company of Alaska the right to fur-seal hunting on the Pribyloff Islands for twenty years. The same Company, under a different name, obtained a similar authorization from the Russian Government to hunt fur-seals on the Commander and Seal Islands for the same period of twenty years from the 18th February, 1871. It is thus seen that a private monopoly was conceded on the islands frequented by the fur-seals hardly three years after the expiration of that of the Russo-American Company. This monopoly was recognized to be necessary by the two Governments in consequence of the conclusions of the Russian and American Commissions which were appointed for the purpose of examining the question of fur-seal hunting and the means of preserving these animals from complete destruction. According to the terms of the Russian Contract, the number of seals which the Company has the right of killing is regulated every year by the local Russian authorities. Hunting can only be carried on by the inhabitants, except on Seal Island, where the Company can employ its own hunters, the island being uninhabited. In exchange for each skin the Company must pay the natives a certain price as provided for in the Contract. The season of hunting is strictly limited. What most hinders the increase of the fur-seals is the illicit hunting which takes place in the open sea, as well as on the Japanese Islands and sometimes on Seal Island after the departure of the Company's ship, which takes place generally about the middle of October. According to the Japanese Customs Reports, 3,400 fur-seal skins, which represent the produce of this kind of poaching, were imported into Japan in 1884, which amounts to 50 per cent, of all the seal-furs exported from Japan. Till 1862 there was no law in this country prohibiting fur-seal hunting. In 1862 a Law was passed forbidding it, but without effect, as the islands were not sufficiently defended against the inroads of poachers. In the autumn the fur-seals leave the land and make for the south of the Aleutian Islands, where they stay for the rest of the year in the open sea. It is then that they are exposed to the attacks of ships equipped for the hunt which destroy them by every means, fire-arms, nets, harpoons, &c, without distinguishing males from females with young. Only a third of the animals killed in this way are utilized; the rest are lost without any profit. It is to these proceedings that the almost complete disappearance of fur-seals from the coasts of Chile and South Africa, as well as from the Falkland Islands, is to be attributed. It is to be feared that the same fate is reserved for the' islands of the Behring's Sea unless efficacious measures are shortly adopted to protect the fur-seals. ■EEC 208 No. 138. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received July 26.) Sir, Downing Street, July 25, 1888. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of British sealing-vessels in the Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor- General of Canada, with its inclosures, relating to the circumstances in which the schooner " W. P. Sayward" was released under bond at Sitka. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 138. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Cascapedia River, New Richmond, June 25, 1888. WITH reference to previous correspondence upon the subject, I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council of Canada submitting a copy of a letter from the attorney of Captain J. D. Warren with reference to the circumstances under which the seized sealing-schooner " W. P. Sayward" was released under bond at Sitka. thave &c (Signed) f STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 138. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 2\st June, 1888. ON a Memorandum dated the 9th June, 1888, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting the accompanying letter from the attorney of Mr. J. D. Warren with reference to the circumstances under which the seized sealing-schooner " W. P. Sayward" was released under bond at Sitka, and recommending that the same be forwarded to the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies for the information of Her Majesty's Government. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. Mo GEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 138. Mr. Belyea to Mr. Tilton. Dear Sir, Ottawa, Ontario, May 23, 1888. I AM in receipt of a letter from Captain J. D. Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, under date the 15th instant, in which he informs me of the circumstances under which the seized sealing-schooner " W. P. Sayward " was released under bond. He had gone to Sitka to secure, if possible, the release of all the schooners seized in 1887, viz.: the "Grace," "Dolphin," "Anna Beck," "W. P. Sayward," and ^Ada." The bond on release was conditioned on prosecuting an appeal from the Alaska Uistrict Court to the Supreme Court of the United States. The formal motion thus became one " for leave to perfect an appeal,~ and such motion for each of the vessels was made on the 14th April last before Judge Dawson at Sitka, and in every case refused, on the grounds that the time for allowing an appeal had expired. Captain Warren's counsel then applied for a record of the order refusing leave to appeal. This was on Saturday. On Monday following, the 16th April, without any application therefor by the defendant or any one on his behalf, Judge Dawson offered to rescind the order of Saturday in the case of the " W. P. Sayward," and release her to her owners. She was '209 then lying at Puget's Sound, under an order for sale on that day, the offer was accepted (contrary, as Captain Warren says, to the expectations of the United States' authorities at Sitka), and the order of the previous Saturday rescinded and leave granted to appeal. I am not informed as to the amount of the bond. The United States' Marshal at Sitka has been ordered to take remaining schooners, viz., tbe "Grace," "Dolphin," " Anna Beck," and ". Ada," to Puget's Sound for immediate sale. The schooners "Thornton," "Onward," and "Carolena," seized in 1886 and left at Ounalaska, have been, as you are aware, offered to the owners as they now are. All three are high up on the beach and practically worthless. The United States' authorities sold everything in and on these vessels that would bring a dollar, and then attempted to contract the taking of the hulls to San Francisco to be there sold. Finding this would cost more than the damaged hulls would sell for, they offered to give the vessels up to their owners, and had an order to that effect issued. Captain Warren says it is out of the question to go to Ounalaska for these vessels. I may add that the "Sayward " is now in possession of her owners. Very faithfully, &c. • (Signed) A. L. BELYEA, Attorney for J. D. Warren, No. 139. Mr. Phelps to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 30.) My Lord, Legation of the United States, London, July 28, 1888. I BEG to recall your Lordship's attention to the subject of the proposed Convention between the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, and Russia for the protection of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. A considerable time has now elapsed since the last conversation I had the honour to have with your Lordship in regard to it, when it was mutually believed that an early agreement might be arrived at. I am sure your Lordship will concur with me in conceiving it to be for the interest of all parties that a conclusion should be reached as soon as possible. And my Government instructs me respectfully to urge upon Her Majesty's Government the propriety, under existing circumstances, of immediate action. I understand the Russian Government to be prepared to concur in the proposed . Convention as soon as the other Governments concerned are ready to assent to it. I have, &c. (Signed) E. J. PHELPS. No. 140. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 1.) Sir, Downing Street, August 1, 1888. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a telegram received from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the proposed sale by the United States' authorities of the sealing-vessesl " Anna Beck," Dolphin," " Grace," and " Ada," seized last year in Behring's Sea. Lord Salisbury will observe that the Government of Canada urge that the United States' Government may be requested by Her Majesty's Government to postpone the sale of the condemned vessels pending the settlement of the question as to the legality of their seizure. Lord Knutsford trusts that Lord Salisbury will, as soon as practicable, make such communication as may be proper to the United States' Government with a view to give effect to the wishes of the Dominion Government. It will be seen that the matter is urgent. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. [128] 2 E mmi 210 ; •.;• Inclosure in No. 140. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford, (Telegraphic.) July 30, 1888.. , THE sealing-schooners " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," " Grace," and " Ada," which were seized in 1887 in the Behring's Sea, are now being removed to Port Townsend, Puget Sound, from Sitka, in order to be.sold by the United States' Marshal of Alaska. Tfye Judge of the District Court of Alaska has declined to permit the owners to bond the vessels, giving as a reason that their application is too late. My Ministers recommend that the Imperial Government be moved to ask for the interposition of the United States' Government for a postponement of the sale of the condemned vessels pending the settlement of the question concerning the legality of their seizure.. Pray obtain this if possible. On account of time the question is urgent. No. 141. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, August 2, 1888. THE Governor-General of Canada has informed the Secretary of State for the Colonies, by telegraph, that the sealing-vessels " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," " Grace," and "Ada," which were seized last year in Behring's Sea by the United States' authorities, are now being taken to Port Townsend for sale by the United States' Marshal of Alaska, and that the Judge of the Alaska District Court has refused to allow the owners to bond their vessels, giving as his reason that the application for permission to do so was made too late. I have to request you to ask the United States' Government to postpone the sale •ofcthese vessels until the question as to the legality of their seizure has been settled. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 142. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Phelps. Sir, Foreign Office, August 2, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 28th ultimo, calling attention to the question of the proposed Convention between this country, the United States, and Russia for the protection of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea, and I beg leave to say that I hope shortly to be able to address to you a further communication on the subject. I have, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 143. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir Foreign Office, August 2, 1888. REFERRING to your letter of the 15th June last, inclosing copies of a telegraphic correspondence with the Governor-General of Canada in regard to the question of the proposed International Convention for the protection of the fur-bearing seals in Behring's Sea, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit herewith a copy of a letter from Mr. Phelps,* in which, by direction of his Government, he urges the propriety of reaching a conclusion on the subject. I am. to request that, in laying this letter before Secretary Lord Knutsford, you will move him to give as early a consideration as possible to Mr, Phelps' communication. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. * No. 139. 211 No. 144. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, August 3, 18S8. I LAID before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 1st instant, inclosing a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada reporting the intention of the United States' authorities to sell the sealing-vessels "Anna Beck," "Dolphin," " Grace," and ■" Ada," seized last year in Behring's Sea. I am directed by his Lordship to state that, in accordance with Lord Knutsford's desire, Her Majesty's Minister at Washington was instructed by telegraph on the 2nd instant to ask the United States' Government to postpone the sale o£ these vessels pending a settlement of the question as to the legality of the seizure. 1 am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 145. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 10.) Sir, Downing Street, August 10, 1888. IN reply to your letter of the 2nd instant, forwarding a note from the American Minister at this Court urging the early consideration of the question of establishing a close time for seals in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, copy of telegraphic correspondence with the Governor-General of Canada on the subject. The Report referred to in the telegram from Lord Stanley of Preston will probably be received on the 14th instant, and will be communicated to you without delay. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure 1 in No. 145. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, August 8, 1888. UNITED STATES' Government pressing for early reply question of close time Behring's Sea. When may Report be expected from your Ministers ? Inclosure 2 in No. 145. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) August 9, 1888. I SENT last Monday Report asked for in your Lordship's telegram 8th August. No. 146. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 10.) Sir, Downing Street, August 10, 1888. WITH reference to your letter of the 3rd instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of further telegraphic correspondence with the Governor-General of Canada respecting the sale of the vessels seized in Behring's Sea last year, and now lying at Port Townsend. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. [128] 2 E 2 m& iSWHHH Bttl 212 Inclosure 1 in No. 146. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) August 4, 1888. WITH reference to my telegram of the 30th July, I am informed by the Minister of Fisheries that the schooners " Dolphin," " Grace," "Ada," and "Anna Beck" will be sold at Port Townsend, in Washington Territory, on the 22nd August. Immediate intervention of Home Government, as previously asked for, is earnestly requested. Inclosure 2 in No. 146. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, August 7, 1888. I HAVE received your telegram of 4th August. Instructions sent 2nd August to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington to ask United States' Government that, pending settlement of question of legality of seizure, sale of vessels might be postponed. No. 147. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Heceived August 18. Sir, Downing Street, August 18, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 10th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding a Minute of his Privy Council on the subject of the proposal of the United States' Government for the establishment of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. In view of the explanations of the Dominion Government, which state very clearly the strong objections to the proposed close season, it appears to Lord Knutsford that it will be necessary for the United States' Government to make some modified proposal if the negotiations are to have any useful result. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 147. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, August 3, 1888. WITH reference to your Lordship's despatch of the 8th March last, transmitting a copy of a letter from the Foreign Office, with a note from the American Minister in London, submitting a proposal for regulating the seal fishing in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, concurring in a Report of my Minister of Marine and Fisheries protesting against this proposal. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 147. Report of a Committee of the Honourable Privy Council for Canada, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the \4th July, 1888. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a despatch, dated the 8th March, 1888, from the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, transmitting a copy of a letter from the Foreign Office, with a note from the United States' Minister in London, submitting a proposal from vTrrarajwraTTrirw OT! J£r. Secretary Bayard for the establishment of a close season for the seal fishing in and near Behring's Sea, to extend from the 15th April to the 1st November of each year, and to be operative in the waters lying north of latitude 50° north and between longi- tudc 160° west and 170° east from Greenwich, in which despatch Lord Knutsford. asks to be favoured with any observations which the Canadian Government may have to offer on the subject. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the said despatch and inclosures' were referred, submits a Report thereon, dated the 7th .1 uly, 1888, protesting against Mr. Bayard's proposal as an unjust and unnecessary interference with, or rather prohibition of, rights so long enjoyed to a lawful and remunerative occupation upon the high seas. The Committee concur in the said Report, and advise that a copy thereof, and of this Minute, if approved, be transmitted by your Excellency to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 147. Minute. Department of Marine and Fisheries, Canada, Ottawa, July 7, 1888. THE Undersigned has the honour to submit, for the consideration of the Governor-General in Council, the following observations in reply to a despatch from. Lord Knutsford to Lord Lansdowne, dated the 8th March, 1888, and inclosing a proposal from Mr. Secretary Bayard for the establishment of a close season for the seal fishing in and near Behring's Sea, to extend from the 15th April to the 1st November of each year, and to be operative in the waters lying north of latitude 50° north and" between longitude 160° west and longitude 170° east from Greenwich. Before entering upon the discussion of this proposition, the Minister desires to call attention to a sentence in a letter from Lord Salisbury to Sir L. S. West, dated the 22nd February, 1888, and forming a part of the above-mentioned despatch, in which Lord Salisbury says:— " The United States' Minister called to-day at the Foreign Office and spoke to me about the question of the fur seals in Behring's Sea. He said that the difficulties in regard to the seal fisheries in that sea were mainly connected with the question of the close time, and that no attempt had been made by the authorities of the United States, to stop the fishing there of any vessels at the time when it was legitimate." This clearly implies that Lord Salisbury had been led by the United States' Minister to believe that there is a fixed close and open season for the killing of seals in. Behring's Sea which is common to all vessels of all nationalities, and that during the. open season these may legitimately and without molestation pursue the business of catching seals. The facts of the case appear to be that within the limits of the Territory of Alaska, which by the United States' contention includes the waters of Behring's Sea as far westward as a line drawn from a point in Behring's Straits south-west to the meridian of longitude 173° west, the killing of fur-bearing animals, amongst which the seal is included, is prohibited by law; that repeated warnings to this effect have been given by the United States' authorities, and that vessels both of Canada and the United States have within the past two years been seized and condemned for killing seals within these waters. It also appears that in the Islands of St. George and St. Paul, during the months of June, July, September, and October of each year, the United States' Government allows the slaughter of seals to the number of 100,000 by certain citizens of that country known as the Alaska Commercial Company, for which monopoly the United States' Government is paid a yearly revenue of more than. 300,000 dollars. At no season of the year, and to no other persons whatever, is it permitted to kil] a single seal within what is claimed as the limits of the Territory of Alaska. It is evident, therefore, that there is no part of the year when citizens of any country, with the sole exiception of the Alaska Commercial Company, can legitimately kill seals within the limits named; and when Mr. Phelps stated to Lord Salisbury that " no attempt had been made by the authorities of the United States to stop the fishing there mama 214 of any vessels at the time when it was legitimate," his statement should be read in conjunction with the fact that there is no period of the year when it is legitimate for any vessels to fish for seals in the waters of Alaska. The proposal to fix a close time is based by Mr. Bayard upon the alleged necessity of immediate measures to prevent the destruction of the seal fishery in Behring's Sea and the North Pacific Ocean. It is not clear from any information at present possessed that any pressing and absolute necessity exists for any such measures, so far as shown by the present condition of that fishery in the North Pacific. From a Report made by the Special United States' Treasury Agent in Alaska,* dated the 31st July, 1887, it appears :— 1. That none but young male seals are allowed to be killed on the Pribyloff Islands, and of these only 100,000 annually. 2. That a careful measurement of the breeding rookeries on St. Paul and St. .George Islands showed 6,357,750 seals, exclusive of young males. . 3. That 90 per cent, of the pups bred by these go into the water, leaving a mortality of but 10 per cent, at the place of breeding. 4. That fully one-half of the above 90 per cent, of pups returned the following year as yearlinsjs to the rookeries, leaving thus a total mortality of 45 per cent, from various causes at sea. It needs but a slight consideration of these figures to demonstrate that an addition of millions each year must be made to the surviving seal life in the North Pacific Ocean. The Agent in his Report says: " This vast number of animals, so valuable to the Government, are still on the increase. The condition of, all the rookeries could not be better." Against the enormous yearly increase of seal life may be placed the average annual slaughter as given in the Memorandum attached to Mr. Bayard's letter, viz., 192,457 for the whole world, or for the seals near to Behring's sea as follows:— Pribyloff Islands Commander Islands and Robbin Reef Japan Islands .. .. North-west coast of America Or a total of .. 94,967 41,898 4.000 25,000 165,860 With an annual clear increase of millions, and an annual slaughter of less than 200,000 in the North Pacific Ocean, it surely cannot be contended that there is any necessity for such stringent and exclusive measures as the one proposed in order to preserve the seal fishery from threatened destruction. Not only would it appear that the present rate of catch could be permitted, and a continual increase of the total number of seals be assured, but it would seem that this annual take might be many times multiplied without serious fears of exhaustion so long as the present conditions of breeding on the Pribyloff Islands are preserved. The time proposed as close months deserves consideration, viz., from the 15th April to the 1st November. For all practical purposes, so far as Canadian sealers are concerned, it might as well read from the 1st January to the 31st December. It is a well-known fact that seals do not begin to enter the Behring's Sea until the middle or end of May; they have practically all left those waters by the end of October. The establishment of the proposed close season, therefore, prohibits thb taking of seals during the whole year. Even in that case, if it were proposed to make this close season operative for all on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George as well as in the waters of the Behring's Sea, it could at least be said that the close time would bear equally on all. But the United States' Government propose to allow seals to be killed by their own citizens on the rookeries, the only places where they haul out in Alaska, during June, July, September, and October, four of the months of the proposed close season. The result would be that while all others would be prevented from killing a seal in Behring's Sea, the United States would possess a complete monopoly, and the effect would be to render infinitely more valuable and maintain in perpetuity the seal fisheries of the North Pacific for the sole benefit of the United States. It is to be noted that the area proposed by Mr. Bayard to be affected by the close * Executive Document No. 31, 50th Congress, 1st Session. •215 season virtually covers the whole portion of the Behring's Sea in which the'exclusive right of sealing has, during 1886 and 1887, been practically maintained by the United States* Government. To this is added a part of the North Pacific Ocean, north 50° of north latitude, and which commands the approach of the seals to the passes leading into Behring's Sea, By the adoption of this area and close season the United States would gain, by consent, what she has for two years held in defiance of international law and the protests of Great Britain and Canada. And while this area would be held closed to aU operations except to those of her own sealers on the Pribyloff Islands, the north-west coast of North America up to the 50th parallel of north latitude and the sealing areas on the north-eastern coast of Asia would be open to her as before. The device, if successful, would feed and perpetuate the rookeries on St. Paul and St. George Islands, and add immensely to their value, while it cuts off at one blow the most valuable portion of the high seas from all participation by the sealers of all other nations. It is to be borne in mind that Canada's interest in this industry is a vital and important one, that she has had a very large capital remuneratively employed in it, and that while by the proposed plan the other Powers chiefly interested have their compensations, Canada has none. To her it would mean ruin so far as the sealing industry is concerned. Mr. Bayard appeals to the Government of Great Britain on the grounds of the labour interested in preparing the seal-skins in London. It is not necessary that the Alaska Commercial Company should do the sole catching of seals in order to retain this advantage to London labourers. The sealskins taken by Canadian sealers find their way to London to be dressed, just as surely as do those taken by the United States' Company. So long as the fishery is not exhausted, London will, other things being equal, retain the advantage she now possesses in this respect- But Mr. Bayard must misapprehend the sense of justice of Her Majesty's Government if he supposes that they would consent to an unjust deprivation of Canadian rights*, because of the alleged prospect of perpetuating- some small pecuniary advantage to a limited'section of her subjects in London. Under this proposal Russia would lose nothing. Her vessels do not now pursue seals in that part of Behring's Sea ceded by her to the United States in 1867. Russia has valuable seal islands of her own: the Commander Islands in Behring's Sea, and Robben Reef in the Okhotsk Sea, on which there are valuable rookeries, and the Russian Government draws a considerable revenue therefrom, as they are under lease to this same Alaska Commercial Company. This part of Behring's Sea does not fall within the proposed closed area. It has been already shown that the United States would gain largely by the establishment of this close period. From her rookeries on the Pribyloff Islands she draws now a yearly revenue of over 300,000 dollars. This would not only not be interfered with, but .would be enormously increased by reason of the perpetual monopoly she would enjoy under the proposed arrangement. But while this is true as to Russia and the United States, Canada would lose the enjoyment of a lucrative right long possessed, and this loss would be fatal to her prosecution of the seal industry, and would be unrelieved by a single compensation. It is manifest, from a perusal of Mr. Bayard's letter, that the proposition is to prevent the killing of seals during the close time by any process whatever within the area set apart, except, of course, upon the Pribyloff Islands. Experienced sealers aver that by the present methods of hunting with gun and spear not more than one in ten of the seals struck is lost, and it is not believed that these methods are so destructive as Mr. Bayard alleges. The method of taking seals by means of the net is not a destructive method, and yet it is proposed to prohibit this as well. It appears, therefore, that what Mr. Bayard intends is to entirely prevent the killing of seals within the area proposed by any methods or by any persons except by the methods employed upon the Pribyloff Islands and by the citizens of the United States, who may, for the time being, enjoy the monopoly of taking seals thereon. Against this unjust and unnecessary interference with, or rather prohibition of, rights so long enjoyed to a lawful and remunerative occupation npon the high seas, the Undersigned begs to enter his most earnest protest. (Signed) GEO. E. FOSTER, Acting Minister of Marine and Fisheries. UMtt/maimaa 216 ill ■ : No. 148. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(^Received August 20.) Sir, Downing Street, August 18, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 10th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of two despatches from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the proposed sale at Port Townshend of four of the British sealing-vessels captured last year in Behring's Sea. Lord Knutsford hopes that the Minute of the Canadian Government, inclosed in .Lord Stanley of Preston's despatch of the 26th July, will receive Lord Salisbury's .attentive consideration. I am at the same time to request that Her Majesty's Minister at Washington may fee desired to report when the appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the | W. P. Sayward " is likely to come on, and to report generally on the progress of the case. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 148. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford., My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, July 26, 1888. WITH reference to previous correspondence relative to the pending proceedings in the case of Canadian sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward to your Lordship an extract of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, based upon Sir L. West's despatch of the 19th March,* a copy of which, together with other correspondence, noted in the margin, is inclosed herewith. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON.. ,Inclosure 2 in No. 148. Extract from a Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by His Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on July 7, 1888. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a despatch dated the 19th March, 1888, from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, relative to pending proceedings in the cases of Canadian sealers seized in Behring's Sea. The Sub-Committee of Council to whom the question was referred report. as follows:— In the despatch of the 19th March, 1888, Sir Lionel Sackville West states that the Attorney-General of the United States had intimated that Rule 10 of the practice in Admiralty and Rules of the Supreme Court (1887) make it plain that the confiscated sealing:ships seized in Behring's Sea can be bonded pending appeal; and Sir Lionel Sackville West further states that, as to the question whether such vessels can be bonded without obligation to appeal, he is advised that, since it was agreed in the Conference that the question of damages should be reserved, any such request would open up the whole question of damages on each side. The Sub-Committee observe that the obligation sought to be imposed upon the owners of the Canadian vessels seized in Behring's Sea of appealing from the decision of the Magistrate of Sitka to the Supreme Court of the United States, is obviously one which cannot with justice or propriety be enforced. Some doubt exists as to the ■right of appeal, and if it be held that no appeal will lie, the bonds will be forfeited. Apart from this risk* however, which the owners of the vessels are asked to take npon themselves, it appears that the giving of bonds of such a nature would involve the admission that the Courts of the United States had jurisdiction in regard to the seizures, and that the laws of the United States applied to the cases of these vessels, * See No. 110- X£££2SSHaKB9 ^iwwshw^iuwii wfiuam 217 such propositions could by no means be admitted. The vessels had not entered within the waters over which the laws of the United States extend, and over which the Executive or Judiciary of that country have any authority. The vessels in question were molested in a lawful occupation on the high seas, and were seized by vessels in the service of the United States but possessing no right whatever to molest the people of Canada or their property on the ocean. Similar outrages have been committed in the preceding year, and the vessels seized then were ordered to be surrendered by the United States' authorities. In the present cases, therefore, the repetition of such acts of violence was a proceeding for which the owners of the vessels have a right to expect that Her Majesty's Government will demand and exact redress. They should not be asked to seek that redress in the Courts of anv foreign, country whatever, and the Courts of the United States have no more cognizance of their complaint than the Courts of any other foreign country. The Committee, concurring in the above Report, advise that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and also to the British Minister at Washington. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 3 in No. 148. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Lansdowne, March 19, 1888. [See Inclosure 2 in No. 110.] f|§;'; Inclosure 4 in No. 148. Mr. Foster to Sir L. West, March 6, 1888. [See Inclosure 1 in No. 110.] Inclosure 5 in No. 148. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Sir L. West. (Extract.) Government House, Ottawa, March 23, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith, for your information, copy of a despatch which I have addressed to the Secretary of State for the Colonies* upon the subject of the Canadian sealing-vessels seized by United States' cruizers in the Behring's Sea. Should you be able to obtain any information in regard to the action likely to be taken during the present year by cruizers of the United States in the Behring's Sea against vessels frequenting those waters, I shall be much obliged if you will put me in possession of it. Inclosure 6 in No. 148. Lord Stanley of Preston to Sir L. West. Sir, The Cascapedia, New Richmond, July 21, 1888. WITH reference to your despatch of the 19th March, inclosing a copy of a telegram which you had received from my Minister of Marine and Fisheries relative to the pending proceedings in the cases of Canadian sealing-vessels seized in Behring^s Sea, and in reply thereto, setting forth the opinion of the Attorney-General that Rule X of the practice in Admiralty and Rules of the Supreme Court (1887) make it plain that confiscated ships can be bonded pending appeal, I have the honour to [128] * See Inclosure in No. 114".' 2 F 218 forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council concurring in a report of the Sub-Committee to whom the question was referred. I have communicated a copy of the inclosed Minute of Council to the Secretary of State for the Colonies. pill I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 7 in No. 148. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, August 4, 1888. WITH reference to my telegram of the 30th ultimo requesting that the Imperial authorities may urge the United States' Government to take steps for postponing the sale of the sealing schooners "Anna Beck," "Dolphin," " Grace," and " Ada," which were seized last year in Behring's Sea, pending the settlement of the question concerning the legality of their seizure, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Manute of the Privy Council, upon which my telegram was founded. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 8 in No. 148. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by His Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on July 30, 1888. THE Committee have had under consideration a telegram dated the 20th July, 1888, from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia with respect to the bonding of the sealing-schooners " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," " Grace," and " Ada," seized in Behring's Sea in 1887. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the said telegram was referred, recommends that the Imperial Government be moved to request the interposition of the United States' Government to have the sale of the condemned vessels postponed pending the settlement of the question as to the legality of their seizure. The Committe submit the above for your Excellency's approval, and advise that your Excellency be moved to communicate by cable to the Colonial Secretary the request of the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, and to urge upon Her Majesty's Government the necessity for immediate communication with the United States' Government with a view to save from further and disastrous loss the owners of the condemned vessels. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. W&EB, Clerk, Privy Council, Canada. Inclosure 9 in No. 148. Lieutenant-Governor Nelson to the Hon. C. H. Tupper. (Telegraphic.) Victoria, British Columbia, July 20,1888. THE following sealing schooners, seized in Behring's Sea in 1887, " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," | Grace," and " Ada," are now being taken from Sitka to Port Townsend, Puget Sound, to be sold by United States' Marshal of Alaska. Judge of District Court of Alaska has refused bonding to owners, giving as reason application too late. Under present circumstances, owners willing and anxious to bond vessels for apprMsed values:— "Anna Beck," 2,600 dollars; "Dolphin," 7,750dollars; "Grace," 10,404dollars; "Ada," 2,900 dollars; or, pending settlement of question, have,sale p&ftponed. W$$s Dominion Government ta^e necessary steps to secure if possible from United) Sla*i§# Government that this arrangement shall be acceded to ? 219 No. 149. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received August 27.) My Lord, Beverley- (Massachusetts), August 6, 1888. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of the 2nd instant, I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of a note which I addressed to the Secretary of State, asking tfiat the sale of the four British vessels seized last year in Behidng's Sea may be postponed pending the settlement of the question of the legality of the seizure. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 149. Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Beverley (Massachusetts), August 6, 1888. I HAVE the honour to inform you that Her Majesty's Government have received intelligence to the effect that the four British ships seized last year in Behring's Sea are being taken to Port Townsend for sale by the United States' authorities. It would seem that this action has been taken in consequence of the Judge of the District Court of Alaska having refused to bond the owners upon the ground that their application was too late. ^^ The Marquis of Salisbury has now requested me to ask the United States' Government to postpone the sale of the said vessels pending the settlement of the question of the legality of the seizure. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 150. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received August 31.) My Lord, Beverley (Massachusetts), August 16,1888. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of the 2nd August, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I have received from the Secretary of State, stating that, in pursuance of your Lordship's request conveyed through me, the Acting Attorney-General has directed by telegram and letter the postponement of the sale of the vessels in question, and has also instructed the United States' Marshal in charge to receive bonds in lieu of the vessels. I communicated the substance of this note to your Lordship this day by telegraph, and have informed the Governor-General of Canada to the same effect. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 150. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, August 13, 1888. WITH further reference to your note of the 6th instant, conveying the request of the Marquis of Salisbury for a postponement of the sale of four British vessels seized in Behring's Sea last year, I have now the honour to state that I have just received a letter from the Acting Attorney-General, informing me that, in pursuance of the request so made, he had directed by telegram and letter the postponement of the sale of the vessels in question, and has also instructed the United States' Marshal in charge to receive bonds in lieu of the vessels. Accept, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. [128] 2 F 2 220 No. 151. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, September 1, 1888. WITH reference to your despatch of the 16th ultimo, I transmit herewith a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office,* inclosing copies of two despatches from Lord Stanley of Preston to the Secretary of State for the Colonies relative to the proposed sale of four of the British vessels seized when engaged in seal-fishing last year in Behring's Sea. Before taking any further action with regard to these seizures by the American authorities, I request that you will inform me when the appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the | W. P. Sayward " is likely to come on, and to report generally on the progress of the case. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 152. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, September 1, 1888. I HAVE laid ^before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 18th ultimo, inclosing copies of two despatches from the Governor-General of Canada on the subject of the legal proceedings pending before the United States' Courts with regard to the British vessels seized by the American authorities when engaged in seal-fishing in Behring's Sea, and the claims for damages raised by the owners of the vessels. I am to request that you will state to Secretary Lord Knutsford, in reply, that before taking any action on the Minute of the Canadian Government inclosed with Lord Stanley's despatch of the 26th July, 1888, Lord Salisbury has instructed Her Majesty's Minister at Washington to state when the appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States in the case of the •" W. P. Sayward " is likely to come on, and to report generally on the progress of the case. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 153. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. Sir, Foreign Office, September 3, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 16th April last, relative to the proposals received from the Government of the United States for concerted action on the part of the Powers interested in the matter, with a view to the establishment of a close season for the preservation of the fur seals resorting to Behring's Sea, I have to inform you that I have recently had a long conversation with Mr. Phelps on the subject. He stated that his Government were very anxious that an agreement should be arrived at as soon as possible. I pointed out the difficulties felt by the Canadian Government, and said that, while the scheme was favourable to the industries of the mother country, considerable apprehension was felt in Canada with respect to its possible effect on colonial interests. I added that I was still sanguine of coming to an arrangement, but that time was indispensable. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. • Xo. 148. 221 No. 154. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, September 3, 1888. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 18th ultimo, inclosing a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, with a Minute of his Privy Council on the proposal made by the United States' Government for the establishment of a close time for fur seals in Behring's Sea. With reference to Lord Knutsford's suggestion that the Government of the United States should make some modified proposal, I am to request that you will inform his Lordship that Lord Salisbury has recently had a long conversation with Mr. Phelps on the subject. Mr. Phelps stated that his Government were very anxious that an agreement should be arrived at as soon as possible. The difficulties felt on the subject by the Government of the Dominion were pointed out to him, and he was informed that, while the scheme was advantageous to the industries of the mother country, considerable apprehension was felt in Canada as to its possible effect on colonial interests. Lord Salisbury added that he was still sanguine of coming to an arrangement, but that time was indispensable. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 155. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 1.) My Lord, Beverly (Massachusetts), September 13, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 16th ultimo, I have the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith copy of a note which I have received from the Secretary of State, together with copy of the correspondence which accompanied it, relative to the sale of certain British vessels seized in Behring's Sea, which sale had, at your Lordship's request, been postponed, and to request your Lordship's instructions as to the answer to be returned. I have forwarded copies of this correspondence to the Governor-General of ■Canada. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure 1 in No. 155. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Sir, Department of State, Washington, September 10, 1888. REFERRING to previous correspondence in relation to the sale of the four British vessels condemned for taking seals illicitly in Behring's Sea in 1887,1 have the honour to inform you that I have received a communication from the Acting Attorney- General of the 3rd instant, in which an expression of my views is requested upon the propriety of an immediate sale of the vessels in view of certain statements made in regard to them. As an order for the postponement of the sale and the bonding of the vessels was Issued by the Department of Justice in compliance with the request of Lord Salisbury communicated to this Department, I inclose herewith a copy of the letter of the Acting Attorney-General, together with its inclosures, and will be glad to learn whether, in the light of the facts now disclosed, it is still the desire of his Lordship that the sale should not be proceeded with. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. 222 Inclosure 2 in No. 155. Mr. Jenks to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Washington, September 3, 1888. I HAVE the honour to send you copies of letters of the 23rd and 25th ultimo, from Mr. Atkins, United States' Marshal for the District of Alaska, and to ask for an expression of your views upon the propriety of an immediate sale of the vessels mentioned by the Marshal on consideration of the statements he makes in relation to them. I have, &c. (Signed) G. A. JENKS, Acting Attorney-General. Inclosure 3 in No. 155. Mr. Atkins to Mr. Jenks. Sir, Seattle, Washington Territory, August 23, 1888. IN reference to the four condemned British vessels now in my custody, I have the honour to report:— That the owners of the schooners | Anna Beck," " Grace," and " Dolphin " claim that the appraisement made at Sitka one year ago was at the time excessive, and that their value on account of the inclement climate of Alaska has in the meantime been constantly depreciating, and therefore decline to bond them at such appraisement, but request a new appraisement, which, if not granted, they desire the sale to proceed. The owner says, however, that he will furnish satisfactory bonds for the schooner I Anna Beck " at her present appraised value if it can be effected, subject to a final settlement of the matter and without the expense of an appeal to the Supreme Court. Having myself a practical knowledge of the value of such property, I fully coincide with the claimant that the valuation put on the schooners " Grace " and "Dolphin " at Sitka was excessive. The schooner " Ada " is owned and registered at Shanghae, China, and her owner, whoever he may be, has not yet made any claim or appearance. In the meantime, the vessels are remote from my district, thus greatly increasing the responsibility of their safe custody, and the expense thereof constantly increasing. I desire to be instructed, in case vessels are not soon sold or bonded, what further action to take in reference to returning to my district and leaving the vessels in charge of a special deputy. I have, &c. (Signed) BARTON ATKINS. Inclosure 4 in No. 155. Mr. Atkins to Mr. Jenks. District of Alaska, Office of United States' Marshal, Sir, Portland, Oregon, August 25, 1888. IN view of the present situation relative to the British vessels in my custody now moored at Port Townsend, Washington Territory, I beg leave to state as follows :— That all of said vessels, owing to the length of time they have been out of commission, are in a dilapidated condition, and their depreciation in value is constant and rapid. That they are small in size, the combined tonnage of the four being only 249 tons. That the owner of the "Anna Beck," "Grace," and "Dolphin," Captain J. D. Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, has notified me that he prefers that the W Grace " and " Dolphin " should be sold without further delay, and the " Anna Beck " also, unless he can bond that vessel without instituting an appeal to the Supreme Court, or making the journey to Sitka for that purpose. That if longer held in custody, they will have to be removed from Port Townsend to some place secure from the fall and winter winds, for permanent moorings. All 223 of which will be attended by much greater expense comparatively than has heretofore been required for their safe custody. I do not hesitate to recommend that, in interest of all concerned, the vessels, if not bonded, should be sold without delay. It is my purpose soon to repair to Port Townsend, there to await Department orders. I have, &c. ("Signed) BARTON ATKINS. No. 156. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 1.) My Lord, Beverly (Massachusetts), September 15, 1888. WITH reference to your Lordship's despatch of the 1st instant, I have the honour to inform your Lordship that the appeal in the case of the " W. P. Sayward," aUuded to therein, has not yet even been docketed in the Supreme Court of the United States. I have, &e. (Signed) S. SACKVILLE WEST. No. 157. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, October 2,1888. WITH reference to your letter of the 10th August last, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit to you copies of a despatch, and its inclosures, from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington on the subject of the British sealing-vessels seized in Behring's Sea.* I am to request that, in laying Sir L. West's despatch before Secretary Lord Knutsford, you will move him to inform Lord Salisbury what reply should be returned to the inquiry of the United States' Secretary of State with regard to the sale of the vessels seized. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 158. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 9.) Sir, Downing Street, October 8, 1888. WITH reference to your letter of the 2nd instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of telegraphic correspondence with the Governor-General of Canada respecting the bonding of the vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea. Lord Knutsford would be glad if instructions could be given by telegraph to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington to propose to the United States' Government the course recommended in Lord Stanley of Preston's telegram of the 6th instant. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 158. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) WITH reference to M.v. relative to Behring's Sea seizures, Downing Street, October 4, 1888. Bayard's note to Sir L. West of the 10th September what answer should be returned ? No. 155. 224 Inclosure 2 in No. 158. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) October 6, 1888. RECOMMEND that United States' authorities be moved to authorize the reappraisement of "Grace" and " Dolphin," and in case of 1 Anna Beck" to accept proposed bonds of owner, subject to final settlement of matter. No. 159. The Marquis of Salisbury to Lord Sackville. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, October 10, 1888. IN reply to your despatch of the 13th ultimo, I request that you will move United States'Government to authorize reappraisement of "Grace" and "Dolphin," and to accept proposed bond of owner, subject to final settlement of matter, in case of "Anna Beck." No. 160. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, October 10, 1888. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 8th instant, on the subject of the British vessels seized in Behring's Sea. I am to state to you, in reply, for the information of Lord Knutsford, that a telegram has this day been sent to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, requesting him to move the Government of the United States to authorize the reappraisement of the "Dolphin" and "Grace," and to accept the proposed bond of the owner of the | Anna Beck," subject to a final settlement of the matter. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 161. Sir L. West to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 12.) My Lord, Beverly (Massachusetts), September 30, 1888. WITH reference to my despatch of the 13th instant, 1 have the honour to inclose copy of a further note which I have received from the Secretary of State, relative to the four British sealers condemned for taking seals in Behring's Sea, and requesting a decision in regard to the disposition of them. I have forwarded copy of this note to the Governor-General of Canada. I have, &c. (Signed) L. S. SACKVILLE WEST. Inclosure in No. 161. Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West. Department of State, Washington, September 27, 1888. RECURRING to the subject of the four British vessels condemned for taking- seals illicitly in Behring's Sea in 1887, I have the honour to inform you that I have received from the Acting Attorney-General a letter, dated the 26th instant, inclosing copies of letters from the United States' Attorney for Alaska, and the United States' Marshal for Washington Territory, of the 7th and 10th instant respectively, in relation to the same matter. The four vessels, the schooners "Grace," "Dolphin," "Anna Beck," and "Ada," have been transferred by the United States' Marshal for Alaska to the custody of the 225 United States' Marshal for Washington Territory, and are now at Port Townsend, subject to instructions from the Department of Justice touching their sale or other disposition. The Department is informed that none of the vessels have been bonded, and that the owners of three of them have refused to take that step, on the ground that their appraisement was too high. As the season advances, the probability of realizing a fair price for the vessels will diminish, and the expenses incident to their retention by the Marshal are necessarily accruing. These considerations make it proper that a decision in regard to the disposition of the vessels should speedily be reached, and I have the honour to request that if it is desired to postpone the sale still further, the Department may be assured at an early day that an arrangement will be made whereby the vessels may be saved from becoming a loss. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. No. 162. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, October 13, 1888. WITH reference to my letter of the 10th instant, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit to you a copy of a despatch from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington,* inclosing a note from Mr. Bayard, requesting a decision as to the disposition of the four sealing-schooners "Grace," "Dolphin," "Anna Beck," and I Ada." I am to request you to move Lord Knutsford to cause Lord Salisbury to be informed what reply should be returned as to the " Ada." Her Majesty's Minister at Washington has been already communicated with by telegraph in regard to the other three vessels, as you were informed in my letter above referred to. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 163. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 22.) Sir, Downing Street, October 20, 1888. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th instant, inclosing a copy of a despatch from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington,! stating that the appeal in the case of the | W. P. Sayward " has not yet been docketed in the Supreme Court of the United States. In your letter of the 1st ultimo, it was stated that before taking any action on the Minute of the Canadian Government, inclosed in the despatch from Lord Stanley of Preston of the 26th July last, Lord Salisbury had instructed Her Majesty's Minister at Washington to state when the appeal, to the Supreme Court in the case of the | W. P. Sayward " was likely to come on, and to report generally on the progress of the case. As it appears from the answer now received from Sir L. West that there is likely to be considerable delay in this case, Lord Knutsford would be glad to be informed whether, in Lord Salisbury's opinion, action should not now be taken on the Minute of the Canadian Privy Council referred to. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. [128] * No. 161. Kb. 156. 2 G 226 No. 164. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 26.) Sir, Downing Street, October 25, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 8th instant respecting the bonding of certain vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada on the subject. As the papers forwarded by Lord Stanley of Preston do not answer the question in Mr. Bayard's note to Sir Lionel West, dated the 10th September last (inclosed in your letter to this Department of the 2nd instant), so far as concerns the schooner " Ada," Lord Knutsford has telegraphed to the Governor-General of Canada with reference to your letter of the 13th instant, asking what reply should be returned in regard to that vessel. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 164. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, Octobei' 8, 1888. WITH reference to your telegram of the 4th instant, inquiring what answer should be returned to Mr. Bayard's note to Sir Lionel West of the 10th September with reference to the bonding of certain British vessels seized some time since in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of a despatch which I have to-day addressed to Sir Lionel West, covering a copy of an approved Minute of my Privy Council dealing with this subject. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 164. Lord Stanley of Preston to Sir L. West. Sir, Government House, Ottawa, October 8, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your despatch of the" 13th ultimo, covering copy of a note from the Secretary of State of the United States, with copies of correspondence accompanying it, relative to the bonding of the British ships | Grace," " Dolphin," and " Anna Beck," which were seized some time since in Behring's Sea. I now beg to inclose copy of an approved Minute of my Privy Council in relation to this matter, from which it will be seen that my Ministers desire that the Government of the United States may be moved to authorize the reappraisement of the schooners " Grace " and " Dolphin," owing to the fact, which is duly set forth in the correspondence accompanying Mr. Bayard's note, that the appraisement made at Sitka more than a year since is regarded by the owners as having been excessive, and as having become, still more so, consequent upon the exposure of these vessels to the inclement climate of Alaska. As regards the case of the " Anna Beck," the Minute recommends that the United States' Government may be requested to give instructions that the proposed bonds of, the owner may be accepted, subject to a final settlement of this question. I have, &c. STANLEY OF PRESTON. (Signed) 2HT8BEES 227 Inclosure 9 in No. 164. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by Ms Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 30th September, 1888. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a despatch from Sir L. West to Lord Stanley, under date the 13th September instant, oovering copy of a note from the Secretary of State for the United States, together with copies of correspondence which accompanied it, relative to certain ships which had been seized in Behring's Sea. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the above was referred, reports that on the 30th July last a Minute of Council was adopted as follows:— "The Committee have had under consideration a telegram dated the 20th July, 1888, from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, with respect to the bonding of the sealing schooners ' Anna Beck,' ' Dolphin,'' Grace,' and' Ada,' seized in Behring's Sea in 1887. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the said telegram was referred, recommends that the Imperial Government be moved to request the interposition of the United States' Government to have the sale of the condemned vessels postponed, pending the settlement of the question as to the legality of their seizure. "The Committee submit the above for your Excellency's approval, and advise that your Excellency be moved to communicate by cable to the Colonial Secretary the request of the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, and to urge upon Her Majesty's Government the necessity for immediate communication with the United States' Government, with a view to save from further and disastrous loss the owners of the condemned vessels;" and that in reply to this Minute a telegram,1 under date of the 18th August, 1888, was received by your Excellency from Sir Lionel West as follows:— " Acting Attorney Garrison has given directions, both by letter and telegram, to postpone the sale of the schooners. The Marshal has also been directed to receive bonds in lieu of the vessels." The Minister observes that copies of the correspondence referred to confirm the intimation conveyed by the above telegram, that an order for the postponement of the sale, and permitting the bonding of these vessels at the value already appraised, had been made by the Department of Justice at Washington, in compliance with the request of Lord Salisbury. Subsequent to the receipt of this order, the United States' Marshal at Seattle, Washington Territory, informed the Attorney-General for the United States that the owners of the schooners "Anna Beck," " Grace," and "Dolphin," claimed that not only was the appraisement made at Sitka a year previously excessive, but that the value of the vessels, on account of the inclement climate at Alaska, had in the meantime been constantly depreciating, and they therefore declined to bond them, with the exception of the " Anna Beck," at such appraisement, but requested a new appraisement, and stated that if a new appraisement was not allowed, the owners I desired the sale should proceed. It further appears from the same communication, that in the case of one of the vessels, the "Anna Beck," the owner is willing to furnish satisfactory bonds, at the value already appraised, if this can be done, subject to a final settlement of the matter, and without necessitating an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. The Minister further observes that, touching the question of excessive appraisement, the United States' Marshal states as follows:—| Having myself a practical knowledge of the value of such property I fully coincide with the claimant, that the valuation put on the schooners i Grace' and ' Dolphin' was excessive." The Committee recommend, therefore, that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, with a view to moving the United States' authorities to authorize the reappraisement in the cases of the | Grace" and "Dolphin," and that in the case of the "Anna Beck," instructions be given to accept the proposed bonds of the owner, subject to a final settlement of the matter. All of which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Councils Canada. [128] 2 G 2 228 No. 165. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received November 2.) Sir, Downing Street, November 1, 1888. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 25th October respecting tbe bonding of certain vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram received from the Governor-General of Canada relating to the case of the vessel, " Ada." I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 165. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) October 28,1888. IN reply to the inquiry made in your telegram of the 20th October, owners of "Ada" do not object to original appraisement of the vessel. My Ministers advise that action should be taken accordingly No. 166. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, November 17, 1888. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 1st instant, inclosing a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, stating that the owners of the I Ada," one of the sealing ships seized last year in Behring's Sea, do not object to the original appraisement of the vessel. His Lordship directs me to inquire whether Lord Knutsford desires that the substance of Lord Stanley's telegram should be sent to Her Majesty's Legation at Washington, for communication to the United States' Government. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 167. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received November 21.) Sir, Downing Street, November 21, 1888. IN reply to your letter of the 17th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to acquaint you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, that he thinks it desirable that the substance of the telegram from the Governor-General of Canada respecting the sealing ship "Ada " should be communicated to the Government of the United States. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 168. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Herbert. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, November 22, 1888. WITH reference to my telegram of the 10th ultimo, you should inform United States' Government owners of " Ada " do not object to original appraisement of the vessel. raeaTWTMffiwmTOTOEi-raraiTftwaaBm 229 No. 169. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received November 26.) Sir, Downing Street, November 26,1888. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, with reference to previous correspondence, copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, and of a telegram addressed to him respecting the case of the " Ada," one of the vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 169., Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, October 27, 1888. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of the 20th instant, and to mine in reply of to-day's date, stating that the owners of the "Ada" do not object to the original appraisement, I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council upon which my telegram was based. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 169. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 27th October, 1888. THE Committee of the Privy Council having referred the telegram of the 20th October instant (1888), from Lord Knutsford, in the terms, "Referring to your telegram 6th October, Behring's Sea, and despatch 8th October; what answer should be returned, 'Ada?'" to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, who is advised by a despatch from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia that the agent for the owners of the schooner "Ada " does not object to the original appraisement, respectfully recommend that your Excellency be moved to telegraph Lord Knutsford in the above sense in answer to his telegram of the 20th October instant. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 169. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, November 6, 1888. WITH reference to your telegram of 27th October, United States' Government will be informed that owners of " Ada " do not object to original appraisement. I presume it will be for owners to take any further action. No. 170. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 4.) Sir, Downing Street, December 3, 1838. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, inquiring whether any answer has yet been received from the United States' Government on the subject of the reappraisement of the vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea. The telegram from Lord Stanley of the 6th October, referred to in his present message, was communicated to you in the letter from this Department of the 8th of that month. Lord Knutsford would be glad to learn whether any answer has been received from the United States' Government on this subject, and, if not, he desires me to suggest that a reply should be asked for by telegraph. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure in No. 170. The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) November 29, 1888. HAVE you answer from Washington relative to reappraisement of vessels "Grace," I Dolphin," " Anna Beck," referred to in my telegram of the 6th October ? Governor of British Columbia presses for reply. No. 171. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Herbert. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, December 5, 1888. WHAT answer from United States' Government as to Behring's Sea seizures referred to in my telegram of 10th October ? No. 172. Mr. Herbert to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 5.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, December 5, 1888. IN reply to your telegram of to-day, I have received no answer from United States' Government. Have again asked to-day for a reply. No. 173. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Si Foreign Office, December 7, 1888. H reply to your letter of the 3rd instant, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state to you, for the information of Secretary Lord Knutsford, that no reply has been returned by the United States' Government to the request that they would authorize the reappraisement of the British vessels " Grace " and " Dolphin " seized in Behring's Sea. Mr. Herbert, who is in charge of Her Majesty's Legation at Washington, has reported in a telegram, dated the 5 th instant, that he had on that day again asked for an answer from the United States' Government. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 174. Mr. Herbert to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 11.) My Lord, I HAVE Washington, November 30, 1888. the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 22nd, and to state that Mr. Bayard, in reply to my communication, that the owners i Bf5a»s?rawBBrn5xainsKVS£. 231 of the "Ada" did not object to the original appraisement, has informed me that the Attorney-General has been made acquainted with their decision. I have, &c. (For M. H. Herbert), (Signed) ARTHUR HERBERT. No. 175. Mr. Herbert to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 24.) My Lord, Washington, December 12, 1888. ON the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 5th instant, I immediately wrote to Mr. Bayard pressing for a reply to Lord Sackville's note of the 12th October on the subject of the re-appraisement of the British sealers seized in Behring's Sea in 1887, and I have now received a note from him, copy of which with its inclosures I inclose herewith, in which he states that he has been informed by the Attorney-General that orders were given on the 14th ultimo for the sale of the vessels in question, but that he has not yet heard whether the sale has been effected or not. As soon, however, as he is informed by the Department of Justice he will duly advise me as to what has taken place. I have sent a copy of Mr. Bayard's note to the Governor-General of Canada. I have, &c. (Signed) MICHAEL H, HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 175. Mr. Bayard to Mr. Herbert. Sir, Department of State, Washington, December 10, 1888. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 5th instant, in which you call attention to the note of Lord Sackville of the 12th October last, in relation to the appraisement of three of the four British schooners seized and condemned for illicitly taking seals in Behring's Sea in 1887. The Dote referred to was at once communicated to the Department of Justice with a request for'an opinion on the question of re-appraisement. Some time previously, upon the request of the Marquis of Salisbury, the sale of the schooners had been stayed by this Government in order that full opportunity might be given to their owners to make some arrangements whereby they might become repossessed of the vessels. On the 11th October, the day preceding the date of the note of Lord Sackville above referred to, the Attorney-General wrote to this Department a letter, copy of which is inclosed, in which he intimated an opinion that the interests of both the United States and the claimants would he best subserved by a speedy sale of the vessels. By this letter it appears that, although the schooners had long since been condemned, no claims had been filed by their owners and no bonds given for costs. Nevertheless, the Department again consulted the Department of Justice in regard to the proposition contained in the note under date of the 12th October. Under date of the 20th October last a reply from the Attorney-General was received, copy of which is inclosed. 'To this I made answer on the 27th October, expressing my concurrence in the view of the Attorney- General, that, under the circumstances, the wiser course for all concerned was to let the sale of the vessels take place at once, as delay seemed impracticable, and could only be productive of loss. On the 14th of last month the Attorney-General informed that he had that day directed the United States' Marshal in charge of the vessels at Port Townsend, Washington Territory, to take the necessary steps to effect a sale of the four vessels as speedily as possible. Since that time no correspondence on the subject has taken place with the Department of Justice except a request from this Department on the 17th ultimo that it might be informed of the proceedings of the Marshal under the order above stated. When a response to this request shall have been received you will be duly advised of its contents. I have, &c. (Signed) T. F. BAYARD. 232 Inclosure 2 in No. 175. Mr. Garland to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Department of Justice, Washington, October 20, 1888. BY your communication of the 17th October, 1888, you requested an expression of my views on the arrangement proposed by the British Government in regard to the disposal of the vessels " Grace," " Dolphin," and " Anna Beck." The arrangement referred to is that the United States authorize a re-appraisement of the schooners " Grace " and " Dolphin," and that instructions be given in the case of the " Anna Beck " that bonds of the owner maybe accepted subject to tbe final settlement of the question. The libels against the vessels were submitted on the stipulation, dated the 10th day of September, 1887, by M. W. Drake on behalf of the masters, they were, on or about the 3rd day of October, 1887, after hearing condemned, and in pursuance of the terms of the stipulation, were ordered to be sold at Port Townsend. The time for appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States has long since expired. On the 25th day of August, 1888, the United States' Marshal for Alaska reported " that the owner of the ' Anna Beck,' | Grace,' and ' Dolphin,' Captain J. W. Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, notified me (him) that he prefers that the ' Grace' and 'Dolphin' should be sold without further delay, and the 'Anna Beck' also, unless he can bond that vessel without instituting an appeal to the Supreme Court, or making the journey to Sitka for that purpose." The aggregate tonnage of the three vessels, with the | Ada " (for which no owner has been heard from), is but 279 tons. The vessels, if not sold, will soon be substantially valueless. If attempt be made to keep them over winter a total loss may result. I therefore adhere to the views expressed in my former communication, that the interests of all concerned will be best subserved by an early sale, and earnestly hope I may receive a prompt communication from you concurring therein. Very respectfully, (Signed) A. H. GARLAND, Attorney-General. Inclosure 3 in No. 175. Mr. Grant to Mr. Garland. District of Alaska, Attorney-General's Office, Dear Sir, Sitka, September 20, 1888. MARSHAL returned from Port Townsend says no vessel was bonded, and now the parties have concluded not to bond, and want the sale to go on, but I shall instruct the Marshal to await instructions from you. How long shall I wait for the parties to act ? No owners have appeared on the record ; the record does not show who they are. No claims are filed, or bonds for costs given. The cases were submitted on the agreement signed by Mr. Drake for the masters, and on his demurrer as Representative of Canadian Government. Verv respectfully, (Signed) WHIT. M. GRANT, District Attorney. Inclosure 4 in No. 175. In the District Court of the Territory of Alaska. The United States v. the British Schooners "Dolphin," "Anna Beck," "Grace," and § Ada." IT is hereby stipulated and agreed upon between the plaintiffs and the masters of the defendant schooners that the demurrer filed in the matter of the information^ against J. D. Warren, and the agreement therein, shall apply to the libels filed or to be filed against the above vessels. It is further stipulated and admitted as a fact that the masters of the above-named vessels did kill seals during the month of July 1887, in 233 that portion of Behring's Sea claimed by the United States under the Treaty of 1867 between Russia and the United States, and beyond the limit of 10 miles from any land. It is further stipulated that in case the vessels or any of them shall be condemned, by any order of the Court, that the same shall not be sold until the expiration of three months from the publication of any order ordering such sales, and that such sales shall take place at Port Townsend or some other point on Puget Sound. It is further stipulated that the defendants may give security for appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, or such other Court as may have jurisdiction, by bonds of any qualified bondsmen in Washington Territory, Oregon, or California. Upon the question of facts thus agreed upon, the parties submit the cases to the Court upon the law question raised by the demurrer. On behalf of the Masters of the above schooners, (Signed) M. W. DRAKE. (Signed) A. K. DELANEY, Attorney for the United States. September 10, 1887. Inclosure 5 in No. 175. Mr. Garland to Mr. Bayard. Sir, Department of Justice, Washington, October 11, 1888. I HEREWITH inclose copies of communications received from W. M. Grant, United States' Attorney for Alaska, from the facts submitted by him in connection with those contained in my letter of the 26th September. I submit whether it will not be expedient, and for the best interests both of the United States and adverse claimants, if there be such, that the vessels referred to be speedily sold. An answer is desired at your earliest convenience. Very respectfully, (Signed) A. H. GARLAND, Attorney-General. No. 176. Mr. Herbert to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received January 23.) My Lord, Washington, January 8, 1889. I HAVE the honour to report that Mr. Hoar introduced a Resolution in the Senate on the 3rd instant, asking for any correspondence that may have taken place with Great Britain in regard to the seal-fisheries in or near Behring's Straits, especially as to the seizure or release of any British vessels by the United States; and also asking for information as to the Regulations governing the fisheries which have been adopted by the United States' Government. Mr. Hoar alleges that there have been, and still ^are, widespread complaints of unjust discrimination made against American vessels in those waters, and that while they are not permitted to take seals out at sea, which is perfectly proper and right, no interference is made with the operations of the vessels of other countries, particularly those of Great Britain. This Resolution, which was adopted by the Senate, was probably prompted by the reference in the President's Message to a proposed arrangement with foreign Powers for the protection of fur-seals in Behring's Sea, which has aroused a good deal of curiosity here. The passage in question ran as follows :— " My endeavours to establish, by international co-operation, measures for the prevention of the extermination of fur-seals in Behring's Sea, have not been relaxed, and I have hopes of being enabled shortly to submit an effective and satisfactory Conventional project with the Maritime Powers for the approval of the Senate." I will not fail to send your Lordship a copy of the correspondence asked for as soon as it is presented to Congress. I have, &c. (Signed) MICHAEL H. HERBERT. 234 No. 177. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sh4, Foreign Office, March 23, 1889. MY attention has been called to a telegram, dated Washington, the 22nd March, which appeared in the " Times " of to-day, to the effect that President Sarrison has issued a Proclamation warning foreign fishihg-vessels against entering the waters of Behring's Sea, within the dominion of the United States, for unlawful fishing for fur-bearing animals or salmon. I fiaVC to request you to report ifo me, by telegraph, the exact terms of tbe Proclamation referred to. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 178. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, March 23.) My Lord, Washington, March 23, 1889. I HAVE had the honour to inform your Lordship to-day, by telegraph, that a Proclamation was issued late yesterday afternoon by the President, warning all persons against entering the waters of Behring's Sea within the domain of the United States for the purpose of violating the provisions of section 1956 of the Revised Statutes relating to the killing of fur-bearing animals, and that, if found doing so, they will be arrested and their vessels, apparel, &c, will be seized. I have &c (Signed) j H. G. EDWARDES. No. 179. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, March 23.) My Lord, Washington, March 23,1889. IN obedience to your Lordship's instructions received in your telegram of to-day's date, I had the honour to send to you, by telegraph., the exact terms of the President's Proclamation issued yesterday afternoon, which he issued under the authority granted to him by the Act of the 2nd March, 1889, providing for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska. This Proclamation, copies of which I have the honour to inclose, warns all persons against violating the laws of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea, with regard to killing fur-bearing animals, the penalty for such violation being arrest of person and seizure and confiscation of vessels, apparel, &c. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. Inclosure in No. 179. Extract from the I Washington Post " of March 23, 1889. Alaska without a Governor.—A Proclamation regarding Fttr-bearing Animals and Salmon.—Governor A. P. Swineford some time since wrote out his resignation as Governor of Alaska, and sent it to the Interior Department, where it remains unacted upon. Since then the Governor wrote that he should leave Alaska for home on the 6th March, so that he is now out of the territory, and Alaska is without an executive head. The following Proclamation was issued late yesterday afternoon:— A Proclamation. By the President of the United States. The following provisions of the Laws of the United States are hereby published for the information of all concerned:— BSSgasraEEMWBKCTBEEHaBSS (SB5HHKH5EH 235 Section 1956 Revised Statutes, chapter 3, title 29, enacts that— No person shall kill, any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur seal, or other fta- bearing animal, within the limits of Alaska territory, or in the waters thereof; .and every person guilty thereof shall, for each offence, be fined not less than 200 dollars, nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited; but the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable, or other fur-bearing animal, except for seals, under such regulations as he may prescribe, and it shall be the duty of the Secretary to prevent the killing of any fur seal, and to provide for the execution of the provisions of this section until it is otherwise provided by law, nor shall he grant any special privileges under this, section. Section 3 of the Act entitled | An Act to provide for the protection of the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska," approved the 2nd Marohj 1889, provides that;— Section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea, and it shall be the duty of the President at a timely season in each year to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month at least in one newspaper (if any such there be) published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific Coast, warning all persons against entering such waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section, and he shall also cause one or more of the vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be or to have been engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein. Now, therefore I, Benjamin Harrison, President of the United States, pursuant $0 the above recited Statutes, hereby warn all persons against entering the waters of Behring's Sea within the domain of the United States for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section 1956 Revised Statutes, and I hereby proclaim that all persons found to be or to have been engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United- States in said waters will be arrested and punished as above provided, and that ail vessels so employed, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargoes, will be seized and forfeited. In testimony whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States, to be affixed. Done at the city of Washington, this 21st day of March, 1889, and of the Independence of the United States the 113th. (Signed) BENJ. HARRISON. By the President, (Signed) James G. Blaine, Secretary of State. Sailing orders have been sent to the United States' steamer " Thetis " at the Mare Island Navy Yard to proceed to Sitka, touching en route at such places as her commanding officer may deem neeessary. When she arrives at Sitka and communicates with the civil authorities she will, if the situation is quiet and her presence there is not required, continue on northward, and devote attention particularly to the whaling fleet and to other commercial interests of the United States in the waters about Behring's Straits and.the Arctic Ocean. As the whaling vessels usually leave the Arctic in the latter part of September, the presence of the " Thetis " until then will add security to those engaged in that important industry, and the "Thetis" will remain until they have taken their departure southward, taking care not to be caught in the ice. She will return to Sitka and await further instructions. No. 180. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 26.) Sir, Downing Street, March 26, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to request that you will call the attention of the Marquis of Salisbury to the accompanying copy of a telegram from Washington which appeared in the " Times " of the 23rd instant. , As the Canadian sealing-vessels will shortly be proceeding to the sealing-grounds [128] 2 H 2 236 in Behring's Sea, Lord Knutsford would be glad if Lord Salisbury would telegraph to Her Majesty's Charge" d'Affaires at Washington to ascertain whether the statement in the telegram is correct. I am to suggest also that Mr. Herbert should, at the same time, be instructed, if the statement is correct, to inform the United States' Government that Her Majesty's Government cannot require the masters of British vessels, when fishing in Behring's Sea beyond the 3-mile limit, to recognize the Laws of the United States. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 180. The Alaska Fisheries. Washington, March 22. PRESIDENT HARRISON has issued a Proclamation, warning foreign fishing- vessels against entering the waters of Behring's Sea, vrithin the dominion of the United States, for unlawful fishing for fur-bearing animals or salmon. No. 181. Foreign Office to Colonial Office* Sir, Foreign Office, March 30, 1889. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 26th instant, caUing attention to a telegram which appeared in the " Times " of the 23rd instant respecting the Proclamation by the President of the United States in regard to the seal-fisheries in Behring's Sea, and suggesting that a representation should be made to the United States' Government on the subject. His Lordship directs me to state, for Lord Knutsford's information, that it is proposed to defer any action in the matter until the receipt of the Act for the protection of salmon in Alaska, which is now on its way from Washington. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 182. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—{Received April 1.) My Lord, Washington, March 15,1889. I HAVE the honour to state that, having heard privately from a Member of the House of Commons, who has lately been travelling in Canada, that the sale of the three seized British sealers was ordered to take place on the 26th instant, I telegraphed to the Governor-General of Canada (copy of telegram inclosed) to inquire whether the owners of those vessels were willing to bond their ships, and that, if so, I would endeavour to procure from the United States' authorities a postponement of the sale. In the meantime, I learnt privately that if I addressed such an application to the United States' Government, the Solicitor-General, to whom it would be referred, the matter having been under consideration in his Department, would at once order a postponement. I received last night a telegram (copy inclosed) from Lord Stanley of Preston, informing me that the Canadian Minister of Marine is not of opinion that any intervention on the part of Her Majesty's Legation at this moment would be of value. The owners of the vessels were not willing to bond at the valuation made by the United States' authorities, and the late Administration had refused to allow a revaluation. I shall, consequently, refrain from action in the matter without further instructions. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. /lfilMHrfA,",'I1"w"'m'erM'*aw',1^""r'"'n1™''' 33? Inclosure 1 in No. 182. Mr, Edwardes to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Washington, March 8,1889. I HAVE learnt from private source that the three seized British sealers are to be sold on the 26th instant. I might endeavour to obtain a postponement of the sale if the owners are willing to bond their vessels. Inclosure 2 in No. 182. Lord Stanley of Preston to Mr. Edwardes. March 12,1889. YOUR telegram of the 8th March. Minister of Marine does not think that any interference just now would be of any value. Owners of vessels will not bond at present valuation, and request for revaluation was refused by late Government. No. 183. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 1.) My Lord, Washington, March 18,1889. I HAVE the honour to inclose to your Lordship herewith a copy of a Bill which has become law, providing for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska. I have thought it worthy of transmission on account of section 3 of the Act which might possibly be quoted in connection with the seizure of sealers in the Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. Inclosure in No. 183. [Public—No. 158.] An Act to provide for the Protection of the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. BE it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America, in Congress assembled, That the erection of dams, barricades, or other obstructions to any of the rivers of Alaska, with the purpose or result of preventing or impeding the ascent of salmon or other anadromous species to their spawning grounds, is hereby declared to be unlawful, and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to establish such regulations and surveillance as may be necessary to insure that this prohibition is strictly enforced, and to otherwise protect the salmon fisheries of Alaska; and every person who shall be found guilty of a violation of the provisions of this section shall be fined not less than 250 dollars for each day of the continuance of such obstruction. Sec. 2. That the Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries is hereby empowered and directed to institute an investigation into the habits, abundance, and distribution of the salmon of Alaska, as well as the present conditions and methods of the fisheries, with a view of recommending to Congress such additional legislation as may be necessary to prevent the impairment or exhaustion of these valuable fisheries, and placing them under regular and permanent conditions of production. Sec. 3. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper, if any such there be published at each United States'port of entry 238 on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against (entering said waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruise said waters and arrest all persons, and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein. Approved March 2, 1889. No. 184. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, April 4, 1889. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit, for the information of Secretary Lord Knutsford, a copy of a despatch from Mr. Edwardes, Her Majesty's Charge" d'Affaires at Washington,* on the question of the sale of the three British vessels seized by the United States' authorities in 1887 when engaged in seal fishing in Behring's Sea, and I am to request that you will move his Lordship to furnish Lord Salisbury with any observations he may have to offer on Mr. Edwardes' despatch. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 185. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 5.) (Extract.) Washington, March 25, 1889. . I HAVE the honour to transmit to your Lordship herewith extracts of the correspondence which has been published in response to a Senate Resolution of the 2nd January, 1889, upon the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. Inclosure in No. 185. Extracts from Part IV of the Message from, the President of the United States of February 12, 1889, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, Ex. Doe. No. 106. Mr. Poletica to Mr; Adams. (Translation.) Washington, January 30 (February 11), 1822. THE Undersigned, Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of All the Eussias, in consequence of orders which have lately reached him, hastens herewith to transmit to Mr. Adams, Secretary of State in the Department of Foreign Affairs, a printed copy of the Regulations adopted by the Russian-American Company, and sanctioned by His Imperial Majesty, relative to foreign commerce in the waters bordering the establishments of the said Company on the northrwest coast of America. The Undersigned conceives it to be, moreover, his duty to inform Mr. Adams that the Imperial Government, in adopting the Regulation, supposes that a foreign ship, which stall have sailed from a European port after the 1st March, 1822, or from one of the ports of the United States after the ■ 1st July of the same year, cannot lawfully pretend ignorance of these new measures. The Undersigned, &c. (Signed) PIEEEE de POLETICA. Inclosure 1. Edict of His Imperial Majesty, Autocrat of AU the Bussias. THE directing Senate maketh known unto aE men: Whereas in an Edict of His Imperial Majesty issued to the directing Senate on the 4th day of September, and signed by His Majesty's own hand, it is thus expressed:— " Observing, from Reports submitted to us, that the trade of our subjects on the Aleutian Islands and on the north-west coast of America, appertaining unto Eussia, is subject, because of secret and illicit traffic, to oppression and impediments; and finding that the principal cause of these difficulties is the want of Eules establishing the boundaries for navigation along these coasts, and the order of naval communication, as well in these places as on the whole of the eastern coast of Siberia and the * No. 182. 239 Kurile Islands, we have deemed it necessary to determine these communications by specific Regulations, which are hereto attached " In forwarding these Regulations to the directing Senate, we command that the same he published for universal information, and that the proper measures be taken to carry them into execution." (Signed) Count D. GURIEF, Minister of Finances. It is therefore decreed by the directing Senate that His Imperial Majesty's Edict be published rot the information of aE men, and that the same be obeyed by aE whom it "may concern. [The original is signed by the directing Senate.] Printed at St. Petersburgh. In the Senate, the 7th September, 1821. [On the original is written, in the handwriting of His Imperial Majesty, thus :J Be it accordingly. (Signed) ALEXANDER. Kamennoy Ostroff, September 4, 1821. Inclosure 2. Rules established for the Dim/its of Navigation and Order of Communication along the coast of the Eastern Siberia, the north-western coast of America, and the Aleutian, E/urite; and other Islands. SECTION" 1. The pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing, and of aE other industry, on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of northern latitude; also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of SiflSeria, as weE as along the Kurile Islands from Behring's 'Strait to tbe south cape of the Island of Urup, viz., to 45° 50' northern latitude, are exclusively granted to Eussian Bufepects. Sec. 2. It is therefore prohibited to aE foreign vessels not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging to Eussia, as stated above, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The transgressor's vessel is subject to confiscation along with the whole cargo. Sec. 3. An exception to this rule is to be made in favour of vessels carried thither by heavy gales, or real, want of provisions, and unable to make any other shores but such as belong to Russia'; in these cases they are obliged to produce convincing proofs of actual reason for such an exception. Ships of friendly Governments, merely on discoveries, are likewise exempt from -the foregoing Role (section 2). In this case, however, they must previously be provided with passports • from *he Russian Minister of the Navy. * * * * * * Mr. Adams to Mr. Poletiea. Sir, Department of State, Washington, February £5, 1822. I HAVE the honour of receiving your note of the 11th instant, inclosing a printed oqpy of the Regulations adopted by the Eussian-American Company, and sanctioned by His Imperial Majesty, relating to the commerce of foreigners in the waters bordering on the estabEshments of that Company upon the north-west coast of America. I am directed by the President of the United States to inform you that he has seen with suijHHse^ in this Edict, the assertion of a territorial claim on the part of Eussia, extending to the 51st degree of north latitude on this continent, and a Eegulation interdicting to aE commercial vessels other than Eussian, upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation, the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores to which that claim is made to apply. The relations of the United States with His Imperial Majesty have always been of the most friendly character, and it is tire earnest desire of this Government to preserve them in that state. It was expected, before anf -apt which should define the boundary between the territories of the United States and Eussia on this continent, that the same would have been arranged by Treaty between the parties. To exclude the vessels of our citizens from the shore beyond the ordinary distance to which the territorial jurisdiction extends, .has excited stiE greater surprise. This Ordinance affects so deeply the rights of the United States and of their citieens that I am' instructed to inquire whether you are authorized to give explanations of the grounds of right, upon principles generaEy recognized by the laws and usages of nations, which can Warrant the claims and Eegulations contained in it. I avail, &c. (Signed) , .iOHN QUTSTCY ADAMS. Mr. Poletica to Mr. Adams. Washington, February 28,1822. MR POLETICA repEed on the 28th of the same month, and, after giving a summary of historical incidents which seemed to him to estabEsh the title of Russia to the territories in question by first discovery, said:— " I shaE be more succinct, Sir, in the exposition of the motives which determined the imperial Government to prohibit foreign vessels from approaching the north-west coast of America belonging to Russia within the distance of at least 100 Italian mules. This measure, however severe it may at first appear, is, after aE but a measure of prevention. It is exclusively directed against the culpable enterprises of foreign adventurers, who, not content with exercising upon the coasts above mentioned 240 an Elicit trade very prejudicial to the rights reserved entirely to the Eussian-American Company, take upon them besides to furnish arms and ammunition to the natives in the Eussian possessions in America, exciting them likewise in every manner to resist and revolt against the authorities there established. " The American Government doubtless recollects that the irregular conduct of these adventurers, the majority of whom was composed of American citizens, has been the object of the most pressing remonstrances on the part of Eussia to the Federal Government from the time that Diplomatic Missions were organized between the countries. These remonstrances, repeated at different times, remain constantly without effect, and the inconveniences to which they ought to bring a remedy continue to increase " I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, Sir, that the Eussian possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend, on the north-west coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent, from the same strait to the 45th degree. The extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends aE the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas (" mers fermees "), and the Russian Government might consequently judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especiaEy that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners. But it preferred only asserting its essential rights without taking any advantage of locaEties." Mr. Adanns to Mr. Poletica. Sir, Department of State, Washington, March 30,1822. I HAVE had the honour of receiving your letter of the 28th ultimo, which has been submitted to the consideration of the President of the United States. From the deduction which it contains of the grounds upon which Articles of Eegulation of the Russian-American Company have now, for the first time, extended the claim of Russia on the northwest coast of America to the 51st degree of north latitude, its only foundation appears to be the existence of the smaE Settlement of Novo Archangelsk, situated, not on the American continent, but upon a smaE island in latitude 57°; and the principle upon which you state that this claim is now advanced is that the 51st degree is equidistant from the Settlement of Novo Archangelsk and the establishment of the United States at the mouth of the Columbia Eiver. But, from the same statement, it appears that, in the year 1799, the limits prescribed by the Emperor Paul to the Eussian- American Company were fixed at the 55 th degree of latitude, and that, in assuming now the latitude 57°, a new pretension is asserted, to which no settlement made since the year 1799 has given the colour of a sanction. This pretension is to be considered not only with reference to the question of territorial right, but also to that prohibition to the vessels of other nations, including those of the United States, to approach within 100 Italian miles of the coasts. From the period of the existence of the United States as an independent nation, their vessels have freely navigated those seas, and the right to navigate them is a part of that independence. With regard to the suggestion that the Eussian Government might have justified the exercise of sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea, because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores, it may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea, in latitude 51° north, is not less than 90 degrees of longitude, or 4,000 miles. As little can the United States accede to the justice of the reason assigned for the prohibition above mentioned. The right of the citizens of the United States to hold commerce with the aboriginal natives of the north-west coast of America, without the territorial jurisdiction of other nations, even in arms and munitions of war, is as clear and indisputable as that of navigating the seas. That right has never been exercised in a spirit unfriendly to Eussia; and, although general complaints have occasionaEy been made on the subject of this commerce by some of your predecessors, no specific ground of charge has ever been aEeged by them of any transaction in it which the United States were, by the ordinary laws and usages of nations, bound either to restrain or to punish. Had any such charge been made, it would have received the most pointed attention of this Government, with the sincerest and firmest disposition to perform every act and obligation of justice to yours which could have been required. I am commanded by the President of the United States to assure you that this disposition wiE continue to be entertained, together with the earnest desire that the harmonious relations between the two countries may be preserved. Belying upon the assurance in your note of similar dispositions reciprocally entertained by His Imperial Majesty towards the United States, the President is persuaded that the citizens of this Union will remain unmolested in the prosecution of their lawful commerce, and that no effect will be given" to an interdiction manifestly incompatible with their rights. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN QUINCY ADAMS. Mr. Poletica to Mr. Adams. (Extract.) Washington, April 2,1822. ME. POLETICA replied on the 2nd April foEowing, and after again endeavouring to prove the title of Eussia to the north-west coast of America, from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude, said:— " In the same manner the great extent of the Pacific Ocean at the 51st degree of latitude cannot invalidate the right which Eussia may have of considering that part of the ocean as close. But as the 241 -f-nrperial Government has not thought fit to take advantage of that right, aE further discussion on this subject would be idle. " As to the right claimed for the citizens of the United States of trading with the natives of the country of the north-west coast of America, without the limits of the jurisdiction belonging to j-Eussia, the Imperial Government will not certainly think of limiting it, and stiE less of attacking it there." Mr. Adams to Mr. Middleton. (Extract.) Department of State, Washington, July 22,1823. FEOM the tenonr of the Ukase of the 4th (16th) September, 1821, the pretensions of the Imperial ' Government extend to an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the 45th degree of north latitude, on the Asiatic coast, to the latitude of 51" north on the western coast of the American continent; and they assume the right of interdicting the navigation and fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast. The United States can admit no part of these claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the Peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions, which, so far as Eussian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude, and have no existence on the Continent of America. AT the fourth Conference which preceded the signature of the Treaty of the 5th (17th) April, 1824, Mr. Middleton, the United States' Eepresentative, submitted to Count Nessekode the foEowing paper:— " (Translation.) ".The dominion cannot be acquired but by a real occupation and possession, and an intention (' animus') to establish it is by no means sufficient. " Now, it is clear, according to the facts established, that neither Eussia nor any other European Power has the right of dominion upon the continent of America between the 50th and 60th degrees of north latitude. " StiE less has she the dominion of the adjacent maritime territory, or of the sea which washes these coasts, a dominion which is only accessory to the territorial dominion. " Therefore she has not the right of exclusion or of admission on these coasts, nor in these seas, which are free seas. " The right of navigating aE the free seas belongs, by natural law, to every independent nation, and even constitutes an essential part of this independence. " The United States have exercised navigation in the seas, and commerce upon the coasts above mentioned, from the time of their independence; and they have a perfect right to this navigation and to this commerce, and they can only be deprived of it by their own act or by a Convention." Extract from Convention of April 5 (17), 1824. AETICLE I. It is agreed that, in any part of the great ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shaE be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following Articles. Art. II. With a view of preventing the rights of navigation and of fishing exercised upon the great ocean by the citizens and subjects of the High Contracting Powers from becoming the pretext for an illicit trade, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shaE not resort to any point where there is a Eussian establishment, without the permission of the Governor or Commander; and that, reciprocally, the subjects of Eussia shall not resort, without permission, to any estabEshment of the United States upon the north-west coast. Art. III. It is moreover agreed that, hereafter, there shaE not be 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 54° 40' of north latitude; and that, in the same manner, there shall be none formed by Eussian subjects, or under the authority of Eussia, south of the same parallel. Art. 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 reciprocaEy 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. Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Dallas. Six Department of State, Washington, May 4,1837. I BEGBET to have occasion so soon again to advert to a subject connected with the claims of the United States to the right of trading with the natives of the country, and of fishing on the north-west [128] 2 I 1 242 coast of this continent. You will perceive from a perusal of the accompanying papers that the expiration of the IVth Article of the Convention of 1824 with Eussia is not unlikely to be attended with difficulties to our citizens frequenting that coast in pursuit of lawful objects. The leading features of the ease, to which your attention is now invited (the particulars of which are more fully detailed in the inclosed copy of a letter, dated the 24th November last, from J. C. Jones, Consul of the United States at the Sandwich Islands, to this Department, and of the protest to which it refers), are as follows:— The American brig " Loriot," Blinn, master, sailed from the port of Oahu on the 22nd August last, bound to the north-west coast of America, for the purpose of procuring provisions, and also Indians to hunt for sea-otter on the said coast. It appears that she made the land called Forrester's Island on the 14th September following, and on the 15th anchored in the harbour of Tuckessan, latitude 54° 55' north, and longitude 132° 30' west; that on the 18th a Eussian armed brig arrived in the harbour of Tateskey, latitude 54° 45' north, and longitude 132° 55' west; that on the succeeding day the " Loriot" was boarded by officers from the Eussian brig, who ordered the captain of the-American vessel to leave the dominions of His Majesty the Emperor of Eussia; that Captain Blinn then repaired on board the Eussian brig, where the same orders were repeated to him by the Commander ; that on the 20th and 23rd days of the same mouth these orders were reiterated ; that on the 25th the " Loriot" was boarded by two armed boats from the Eussian brig, and directed to get under way and proceed to the harbour of Tateskey; that on the 27th the armed boats again boarded the American brig, and, compelled the captain to proceed to Tateskey; that when off that place, the weather being threatening, permission was asked of the Eussian Commander to enter the harbour with the " Loriot," which request was denied, and Captain Blinn was again ordered to leave the waters of His Imperial Majesty; and that Captain Blinn, being prevented from procuring supplies or necessaries for his vessel, and from obtaining any Indians (for the purpose of hunting sea-otter), was finally obliged to abandon his voyage and return to the Sandwich Islands, where he arrived on the 1st November of the same year. The harbours designated in Captain Blinn's protest by the names of Tuckessan and Tateskey are not laid down on any Map to which I have referred, and the Department has no knowledge, of any Eussian establishments having been formed on the north-west coast or adjacent islands in or about the latitude given for these places. It will, therefore, be proper to ascertain whether there are, in fact, Eussian Settlements at the points designated, and, if so, you are authorized to make a representation of the whole subject to His Imperial Majesty's Government, complaining of the proceedings in relation to the " Loriot," which are supposed to have been unauthorizedly instigated by the Eussian American Fur Company, and stating that the President cannot but regard this act as one of a most unfriendly character, as the United States have had no official or other notice of the existence of such establishments, and have not, although an application has long since been made for them, ever been furnished by the Eussian Government with the Eegulations, consequent on the expiration of the IVth Article of the Convention, proposed to be applied to American vessels resorting to Eussian Settlements on that coast. On the other hand, should there prove to be no Eussian establishments at the places mentioned, this outrage on the " Loriot" assumes a still graver aspect. It is a violation of the right of the citizens of the United States, immemorially exercised and secured to them as well by the law of nations as by the stipulations of the 1st Article of the Convention of 1824, to fish in those seas, and to resort to the coast for the prosecution of their lawful commerce upon points not already occupied. As such, it is the President's wish that you should remonstrate, in an earnest but respectful tone, against this groundless assumption of the Eussian Fur Company, and claim from His Imperial Majesty's Government for the owners of the brig "Loriot," for their losses and for the damages they have sustained, such indemnification as may, on an investigation of the case, be found to be justly due to them. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN FOESYTH. Mr. Forsyth to Mr. Dallas. (Extract.) Department of State, Washington, November 3, 1837. WITH reference to your remarks regarding the proper construction of the Convention of April 1824 between the United States and Eussia, the 1st Article of that instrument is only declaratory of a right which the parties to it possessed, under the law of nations, without Conventional stipulations, to wit, to navigate and fish in the ocean upon an unoccupied coast, and to resort to such coast for the purpose of trading with the natives. No. 186. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 6.) My Lord, Washington, March 23, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 18th instant, to my telegram of the 23rd instant, to your Lordship's telegram of the 23rd instant, and to my telegram of the same day, I have the honour to report that the Proclamation issued on the afternoon of the 22nd instant by the President, declaring that all persons entering the waters of Behring's Sea within the domain of the United States for the 243 purpose of killing fur-bearing animals, or of violating Regulations to be made with regard to the salmon fisheries of Alaska, shall be arrested and their vessels, &c, seized, has been issued on the power given to him by the " Act to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries in Alaska." Copy of this Act was inclosed in my despatch of the 18th instant, and was one of the last Acts which was passed in the closing hours of Congress. The Bill originated in the Senate where it was passed, after having been reduced to sections 1 and 2 of the present Act, and in that condition sent to the House. At that time there was before the House another Bill of similar import, which had been referred back from the Committee of Merchant Marine and Eisheries, and was waiting to be reached. When the Senate Bill came up before the House section 3 was added to it as an amendment, which amendment the House intended to take the place of their Bill, the passing of which was evidently impossible on account of want of time. The Senate refused to accept tbe Houpe amendment, and the Bill was accordingly referred to a Conference, the result of whose action was its acceptance at the last hour by both Houses. I am told that the President's approval and signature were really only obtained on Sunday, the 3rd instant, but as that day is not a legal day, the approval is dated the 2nd instant. Like many other Acts, it was hurried through the Legislature in its last hours without any but its immediate instigators having any knowledge of its scope or even of its effect, and there can be no doubt but that the House amendment to the Senate Bill, that is to say, section 3, has been the work of those interested in the Alaska Eur-seal .Company. The President has lost no time in making use of the authority it has given him, by issuing the Proclamation which appeared yesterday, one of the objects of which is to again assert the claim of the United States to dominion over the Behring's Sea, which claim the United States' Government denied when it was put forward by the Russian Government by the Imperial Ukase of the 14th (16th) September, 1821. The Proclamation may also deter American and Canadian fishermen from engaging in seal fishing in the open waters of the Behring's Sea this season. Section 1956 of the Revised Statutes provides for the punishment of persons killing fur-bearing animals without the authorization of the Secretary of the Treasury (the taking of seals being still further restricted) " within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof." Section 3 of the Act of the 2nd March, 1889, extends section 1956 to " all the dominion of the United States in the waters of the Behring's Pea." 'T^l It may consequently be thought that the Proclamation following upon the Act is an attempt to settle an international question, which, doubtless, other Powers may still consider an open one. I have, &e. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. No. 187. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 5.) My Lord, Washington, March 25, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 18th instant, inclosing a copy of the Act to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska, I have now the honour to report in detail the course of this Act through the two Houses in Congress. On the 25th February, Mr. Stockbridge, Senator for Michigan, introduced a Bill, copy inclosed, to amend section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better protection of the fur seals and salmon fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes, which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Fisheries. The Bill was reported back by Mr. Stockbridge a few days later, copy of Report is herewith inclosed, the Committee having recommended an amendment in the nature of a substitute. The whole Bill as amended then consisted solely of sections 1 and 2 of the Act as ultimately passed, and in that state it was passed by the Senate, almost without discussion. The Bill was then brought up before the House, and an amendment was offered Mr. Dunn, which added a section 3. The amendment ran as follows :— [128] 2 12 5SBS 244 " Section 3. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States was intended to include and apply, and is hereby declared to include and apply, to all the waters in Behring's Sea in Alaska embraced within the boundary lines mentioned and described in the Treaty with Russia, dated 30th March, a.d. 1867, by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States; and it shall be the duty of the President at a timely season in each year to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said territory and waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein:" and, after an explanation that the object of the amendment was solely the preservation of seals from extermination, was passed. When the Bill came back to the Senate, the House amendment above cited was disagreed to ; the objection being made that the amendment touched upon the question of the rights of the Government of the United States. These, it was maintained by Senator Morgan, had not been considered, or intended to be considered, in the original Senate Bill, and there was now no time to consider a question of such importance. A Conference of the two Houses was consequently called, which agreed to recommend the adoption of the Bill, with an amendment run as follows :— "That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper if any such there be published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein." In this shape the Bill was ultimately accepted by both Houses, the Conferrees from the Houses recognizing that there was no time to allow of the discussion and passage of another Bill of similar import introduced into the House by Mr. Dunn. The approval and signature by the President were obtained on the last day of the Session. Further copies of the Act are herewith inclosed, together with the full report o* the proceedings taken from the Congressional Record. I have, &c. (Signed) H. 6. EDWARDES. Inclosure 1 in No. 187. . 50th Cong-bess, 2nd Section.—S. 3993. In the Senate of the United States. February 25, 1889. Mr. Stockbridge introduced the following Bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Fisheries. A Bill to amend Section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better Protection of the Fur Seals and Salmon Fisheries of Alaska, and for other Purposes. BE it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States1 of America in Congress assembled: that section 1963 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be amended so as to read as follows:— " Section 1963. Within one year prior to the time when the lease heretofore made by the Secretary of the Treasury to the Alaska Commercial Company, of the right to engage in taking fur seals on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, pursuant to the Act of the 1st July, 1870, cap. 189, or when any future similar lease expires, or is surrendered, forfeited, or terminated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease to 245 proper and responsible parties, for the best advantage of the United States, having due regard to the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants, their comfort, maintenance, and education, as well as to the interests of the parties heretofore engaged in the trade and the protection of the fisheries, the right of taking fur seals on the islands herein named, and of sending a vessel or vessels to the islands for the skins of such seals, for the term of twenty years, at an annual rental of not less than 50,000 dollars, to be reserved in such lease and secured by a deposit of United States' bonds to that amount; and the additional sum of not less than 3 dol. 50 c. for each, fur seal-skin taken and shipped from the islands of St. Paul and St. George during the continuance of any lease, to be paid into the Treasury of the United States, and every such lease shall be duly executed in duplicate, and shall not be transferable; and the Secretary of the Treasury is empowered to make all needful regulations for the collection and payment of the same, and to secure the comfort, maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of those islands, and also to carry into full effect all the provisions of this chapter, except as otherwise prescribed. And he shall give at least sixty days' notice of the letting of said lease, by publication in at least one daily paper published in the cities of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Chicago, New Orleans, St. Louis, and San Francisco, inviting bids for the same." Sec. 2. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States was intended to include and apply, and is hereby declared to include and apply, to all the waters of Behring's Sea in Alaska embraced within the boundary lines mentioned and described in the Treaty with Russia, dated 30th March, a.d. 1867, by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation and cause the same to be published for one. month in at least one newspaper published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said territory and waters.for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons, and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been,, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein. Sec. 3. That section 1969 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and the same is hereby, repealed. Sec. 4s. That the erection of dams, barricades, or other obstructions in any of the rivers of Alaska, with the purpose or result of preventing or impeding the ascent of salmon or other anadromous species to their spawning grounds, is hereby declared to be unlawful, and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to establish such Regulations and surveillance as may be necessary to insure that this prohibition is strictly enforced; and every person who shall be found guilty of a violation of the provisions of this section shall be fined not less than 250 dollars for each day of the continuance of such obstruction. Sec. 5. That the Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries is hereby empowered and directed to institute an investigation into the habits, abundance, and. distribution of the salmon of Alaska, as well as the present conditions and methods of the fisheries, with a view of recommending to Congress such additional legislation as may be necessary to prevent the impairment or exhaustion of these valuable fisheries, and placing them under regular and permanent conditions of production. Inclosure 2 in No. 187. 50th Congress, 2nd Session.—Repoet No. 2687. In the Senate oe the United States. February 27, 1889.—Ordered to be printed. Mr. Stockbridge, from the Committee on Fish, and Fisheries, submitted the following Report (To accompany Bill S. 3993). THE Committee on Fish and Fisheries, to whom was referred the Bill (S. 3993) to amend section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better protection of the fur seals and salmon fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes, beg leave to offer a substitute therefor, together with the accompanying Report:— 246 Salmon of different species are abundantly distributed to all the waters of Alaska. from British Colombia to Norton Sound. The greater portion of their life is spent in salt water. They enter the rivers mainly for the purpose of reproduction, and it is there that they become the object of pursuit and capture. The spawning grounds are on the gravelly beds at the sources of the rivers. Any obstructions placed in the rivers which wholly or in considerable measure' prevent them from reaching their spawning grounds will in a very short period of time result in the destruction of valuable fisheries, which under judicious regulation and restraint are a source of continuing wealth and production to the inhabitants of the- territory. Up to the present time one river only, the Korluk, on the Island of Kodiak, has been seriously obstructed by the use of dams or barricades to arrest the ascent of salmon. This stream, hardly 20 miles long, yielded during the season of 1888* salmon to the value of 1,200,000 dollars. This extraordinary production has been at the cost of permanence, and should the use of dams and barricades be continued several years longer, the Korluk will cease to be a salmon river. The marvellous profits reaped by the canners on the Korluk River in 1888 has- stimulated enterprise all along the west coast, and numerous expeditions are being now fitted out for the purpose of engaging in the salmon fisheries of Alaska the present season. Their objective points are the small streams, which can be readily obstructed by dams or other barriers, and it is certain that, in the absence of restraining- legislation, this means of enhancing profits will be resorted to without scruple, and without regard to the fact that such methods generally pursued will result in the- destruction of the salmon fisheries of the territory. Inclosure 3 in No. 187. An Act to provide for the Protection of the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. [See Inclosure in No. 183.] Inclosure 4 in No. 187. Silmon Fisheries of Alaska. Mr. Stockbridge.—I am directed by the Committee on Fisheries, to whom was referred the Bill (S. 3993) to amend section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better protection of the fur seals and salmon fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes, to report it with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. It is a short Bill, and a very important cne to tbe fisheries of Alaska. It is very strongly urged by the Fish Commissioner. I ask for the present consideration of the Bill. The President, pro tempore.—The Senator from Michigan asks unanimous consent that the Bill reported by him may be now considered. It will be read at length for information. The Bill was read. The amendment reported by the Committee on Fisheries was to strike out all after the enacting clause, and insert:— I Tbat the erection of dams, barricades, or other obstructions in any of the rivers of Alaska, with the purpose or result of preventing or impeding the ascent of salmon or other anadromous creatures to their spawning grounds, is hereby declared to be unlawful; and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to establish such Regulations and surveillance as may be necessary to insure that this prohibition is strictly enforced, and to otherwise protect the salmon fisheries of Alaska; and every person who shall be found guilty of a violation of the provisions of this section shall be fined not less than 250 dollars for each day of the continuance of such obstruction. Sec. 2. That the Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries is hereby empowered and directed to institute an investigation into the habits, abundance, and distribution of the-salmon of Alaska, as well as the present conditions and methods of the fisheries, with a view of recommending to Congress such additional legislation as may be- necessary to prevent the impairment or exhaustion of these valuable fisheries, and placing them under regular and permanent conditions of production." jfj -.meme :j By unanimous consent, the Senate, as in Committee of the whole, proceeded^to- consider the Bill. I^WJy*****"*»?Tro*«MWt^»«TVTray»rinjT-TayTll ***—=** 247 amended, and the amendment was third reading, read the third time, and I call the attention of the Senator The President, pro tempore.—The question is on agreeing to the amendment reported i>y the Committee on Fisheries. The amendment was agreed to. The Bill was reported to the Senate as -concurred in. The Bill was ordered to be engrossed for a passed. Mr. Dawes.—The title should be amended, from Michigan to the fact that the Bill does not relate to the fur seals as amended. Mr. Stockbridge.—No, Sir; it relates to the salmon fisheries of Alaska. The title should be amended. The title was amended so as to read : " A Bill to provide for the Protection of the •Salmon Fisheries of Alaska." Mr. Piatt.—Does the section of the Revised Statutes which is referred to relate to ■salmon fisheries ? Mr. Stockbridge.—Yes, Sir. Mr. Stewart.—I should like to have the Bill lie over, so that I may look at it. I •do not know that I shall want to object to it after I examine it. The President, pro tempore.—The Senator from Nevada moves to reconsider the vote by which the Senate passed the Bill. Mr. Dawes.—I wish to say to the Senator from Nevada that unless the Bill goes to the other branch immediately it will be entirely useless. It is the result of an investigation of a Committee in the other branch with reference to the salmon fisheries only. It has nothing to do with the fur-seal fisheries. Mr. Stewart.—I will enter a motion to reconsider and look at it. The President, pro tempore.—The Senator from Nevada enters a motion to reconsider the vote by which the Bill was passed. Mr. Stewart subsequently said: I should like to withdraw my motion to reconsider the Bill in regard to the salmon fisheries of Alaska. The President, pro tempore.—Is, there objection ? The Chair hears none, and the motion to reconsider is withdrawn. The Bill stands passed. Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. The Speaker also laid before the House the Bill (S. 3993) to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska. Mr. Dunn.—Mr. Speaker, the provisions of that Bill are contained in a Bill reported unanimously from the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. It is an emergency Bill, necessary for the preservation of the salmon fisheries of Alaska, •and I ask unanimous consent that it be now considered. It contains nothing else but the necessary measures for the protection of these important fisheries. The Speaker.—The Bill which the gentleman from Arkansas says has been reported from the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries has been read already in the House, and unless there be a demand for tho reading of the Senate Bill, the reading will be dispensed with. There was no objection. Mr. Anderson, of Kansas.—Is this the Bill that makes the lease to the Fisheries ■ Company ? Mr. Dunn.—No; this is a different Bill. I shall report that from the Committee, and give the House ample opportunity to consider it hereafter. This is a Senate Bill, which relates simply to the salmon fisheries. It is identical with sections 4 and 5 of the House Bill, prohibiting the erection of dams or other obstructions in the rivers of Alaska which prevent the salmon from ascending to their spawning grounds. The Speaker.—Is there objection to the present consideration of the Bill ? There was no objection. Mr. Dunn.—I offer an amendment which relates also to the preservation of the. herd of seals, and I ask the previous question upon the Bill and amendment. Mr. Biggs.—I reserve the right to object. The Speaker.—The amendment will be read. The Clerk read as follows :— " Section 3. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States was intended to include and apply, and is hereby declared to include and apply, to all the waters of Behring's Sea in Alaska embraced within the boundary lines mentioned and 248 described in the Treaty with Russia, dated the 30th March, a.d. 1867, by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said territory and waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein." Mr. Taulbee.—I would like to ask the gentleman, in the light of his explanation, the necessity for this Resolution at this time. Mr. Dunn.—The necessity is that the general Bill, reported by the Committee to the House, has been recommitted for the purpose of considering certain amendments relating to the reletting of the lease and the length of its term in future, and in the present condition of the House, it is not at all probable that it will receive final consideration in time to pass the Senate. This amendment simply provides for the protection to the herd of seals and the salmon until there can be further legislation of a permanent character. Mr. Taulbee.—Does it have the effect of sending up the vessels named in this amendment as patrols to protect the Company which already has the control of that business ? Mr. Dunn.—Not at all. It is to protect the herd of seals and enforce the Laws of the United States which were enacted in 1870. Mr. Taulbee.—Why can not the President do that by existing law ? Mr. Dunn.—There has been a relaxation of the enforcement of the Law heretofore, so that unauthorized persons have concluded that the Government does not intend to enforce the Law, and not less that 150 vessels are to-day fitting out to go to Behring's Sea. They will literally cover that sea with unlawful seal-hunters armed with guns, and the destruction of seal-life that will take place, and the fusilade of fire-arms that will occur in that sea during four months of next summer will drive every seal from it that is not killed in the general and indiscriminate slaughter. It does not change the Law, but commands the President of the United States to enforce it. Mr. Buchanan.—And is not this method of getting seals—by shooting them in the open sea—the most wasteful method that could be devised, only about one in five being recovered ? Mr. Dunn.—About one out of seven is recovered. The time has come when the Government must enforce the Laws for the preservation of our herd of seals with firmness and decision, or suffer an absolute destruction of the herd. The danger is imminent, and I hope no gentleman wall object to it. It does not involve a dollar of expenditure. It is useless to protect the seals on the rookeries—the islands of St. Paul and St. George—and leave them to their fate in the waters of Behringte Sea. If they are left witl (Cries lout protection in the sea, there will soon be none left to go to the rookeries. Vote ! " " Vote ! ") The amendment was agreed to. The Bill as amended was ordered to a third reading; and it was accordingly read. third time, and passed. Mr. Dunn moved to reconsider the vote by which the Bill was passed; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the Table. The latter motion was agreed to. OT the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. The President, pro tempore.—Reports of Committees are now in order. Mr. Sherman.—I am instructed by the Committee on Foreign Relations to report l>ack the Bill (S. 3993) to amend section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better protection of the fur seals and salmon fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes, with the House amendment, with a recommendation that the House amendment be disagreed to. I ask for its present consideration. The Presiding Officer (Mr. Chace in the chair).—Is there objection to the present consideration of the House amendment to this Bill ? The Chair hears none. Tbe title of the Bill was read. The Presiding Officer.—Does the Senator wish a Conference ? ^yr<fBT?ff,raTy*w1'w^WCT^',"'n>*?iw^*^^^^ - 249 wittr.-Sherman.—I ask that the amendment of the House be disagreed'toyand then I shall ask for a Committee of Conference. The Presiding Officer.—It is moved by the Senator from Ohio that the Senate disagree to the amendment of the House of Representatives. Mr. Morgan.—Has this Bill passed the Senate ? iMp,-Sherman.—It is J& Senate Bill which has passed the House with an amendment. We now report disagreement to the House amendment. Mr. Morgan.—And the question is on disagreeing to the amendment of the House. ■Mr. Sherman.-—Yes, sir. Mr. Morgan.—I wish to say just this: That in the Report made by the Committee the rights of the Government of the United States were not considered, and not intended to be considered. We only arrive at the conclusion-that>jthe -question presented in the amendment of the House is of such a serious and important a character that the Committee on Foreign Relations would not undertake at this time . to pronounce that kind of judgment upon it which is due to the magnitude of such a question. I desire that the Bill as it passed the Senate originally should pass, because it protects the salmon and other fisheries in Alaska, about which there is no dispute; but this particular question is one of very great gravity and seriousness, and the Committee en Foreign Relations, or at least a majority of the entire Committee, did not feel warranted in undertaking to consider it at this time. Mr. Sherman.—I intended, when the amendment was properly before us, to say to the Senate that the Committee on Foreign Relations were of the opinion that while there was no objection at all to the Senate Bill as it passed, it being for a clear and plain purpose, the question proposed by the House in the form of an amendment was a grave one, and had no relation to the subject-matter of the Bill, and ought not to be connected with it, had no connection really with it, and involved serious matters of international law, perhaps, and of public policy, and therefore it ought to be considered by itself. I was directed by the Committee to state that the subject-matter, the merits of the proposition proposed by the House, were not before us, and not considered by us, and we are not at all committed for or against the proposition made by the House. We make this Report simply because it has no connection with the Bill itself, and it ought to be disagreed to and abandoned, and considered more carefully hereafter. I therefore ask for a Committee of Conference on-the disagreeing votes-of the two Houses. The Presiding Officer.—The question is on agreeing to the amendment of the House of Representatives. The amendment was not concurred in. The Presiding Officer.—The Senator from Ohio now^m'oves-that the Senate ask for a Conference with the House of Representatives on the disagreeing votes.- The motion was agreed to. Alaska Salmon Fisheries. Mi. Dunn.—I submit the following Conference Report. The Clerk read as follows:— "The Committee of Conference on the disagreerngvotes of the*twe"Houses'on the amendments of the Senate to the Bill to provide^r the-protection of the-salmon fisheries of Alaska having met,-after fuKhnnd free.-conference'%ave Agreed to^recom- mend to their respective Houses,- and do recommend: " That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the-amendment-of'the House, and agree to the same, with an amendment to read^ts'follows:— " I Section 3. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominions of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea, and-it shall be the duty of the President at a timely season in each year to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month at least in one newspaper (if any such there be) published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering such waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section, and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons and [128] 2 K 250 seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein.' " And the House agree to the same." (Signed) POINDEXTER DUNN, j BENTON McMILLIN, CHARLES N. FELTON, Managers on the part of the House. (Signed) JOHN SHERMAN, J. T. MORGAN, GEORGE F. EDMUNDS, Managers on the part of the Senate. The following is the Statement accompanying the Report under the Rule :— Statement. | The effect of the amendment is to leave out of the House amendment the words that are descriptive of the boundaries of the waters of Alaska." (Signed) POINDEXTER DUNN, BENTON McMILLIN, C. N. FELTON. Managers on the part of the House. The Conference Report was adopted. Mr. Dunn moved to reconsider the vote by which the Conference Renort was adopted; and also moved that the motion to reconsider be laid on the Table. The latter motion was agreed to. Salmon Fisheries of Alaska. Mr. Sherman.—I ask that the action of the House of Representatives on Senate Bill 3993 be laid before the Senate. The Resolution of the House of Representatives was read as follows :— "In the House of Representatives, March 2, 1889. I Resolved, that the House concur in the Report of the Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendment of the House to the Bill (S. 3993) to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska." Mr. Sherman submitted the following Report:—• " The Committee of Conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the Bill (S. 3993) to provide for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska having met, after full and free conference have agreed to recommend, and do recommend, to their respective Houses as follows:— " That the Senate recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the House, and agree to the same, with an amendment to read as follows :— II Section 3. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea, and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation, and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper (if any such there be) published in each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section, and he shall cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters, and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein.' " And the House agree to the same." (Signed) JOHN SHERMAN, JOHN T. MORGAN, GEORGE F. EDMUNDS, Managers on the part of the Senate.. (Signed) POINDEXTER DUNN, BENTON McMILLIN, C. N. FELTON, Managers on the part of the House. '^^W^7^T^I^iT^'emHnm7^"naWKm;^nl 251 The President, pro tempore.—If there be no objection to the present consideration of the Report, the question is upon concurring in the same. The Report was concurred in. No. 188. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 11.) Sir, Downing Street, April 10, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to acknowledge the receipt of your letters of the 25th ultimo and 3rd instant, inclosing copies of despatches from Her Majesty's Charge" d'Affaires at Washington on the Behring's Sea question.* The Proclamation recently issued by President Harrison with regard to the seal fishing in Behring's Sea appears to raise an important question as to tbe meaning which is.attached by the United States' Government to the words "all the dominion of the United States in the water of Behring's Sea," which is the term used in the Act upon which the Proclamation is founded. Bearing in mind the interpretation which the United States' Government has hitherto placed upon the dominion of the United States in Behring's Sea, it seems to his Lordship worthy of consideration whether some intimation, such as that suggested in tbe letter from this Department of the 26th March, should not be conveyed to the United States. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. No. 189. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 11.) Sir, Downing Street, April 10, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 4th instant, transmitting, for his Lordship's information, a copy of a despatch from Her Majesty's Charge d'Affaires at Washington, on the question of the sale of three British vessels seized by the United States' authorities in 1887, when engaged in seal fishing in the Behring's Sea. 2. In reply, his Lordship desires me to state, for the information of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, that he has no observations to offer on the despatch referred to. 3. Lord Knutsford would be glad to learn what is the present position of the appeal in the case of the steam-ship § W. P. Sayward." I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No, 190. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, April 11, 1889. I TRANSMIT herewith copies of despatches from Her Majesty's Charge" d'Affaires at Washington, as marked in the margin,! relative to the Act of the United States' Congress of the 2nd March, 1889, providing for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska, and the Proclamation which has been issued by the President of the United States in pursuance of its provisions. The Act declares that section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States "includes and applies to all the dominion of the United States in che waters of Behring's Sea," and directs the President, " at a timely season in each year to issue his Proclamation, warning all persons against entering the said waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of the said section," &c. That section (1956) enacts that " no person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska territory, or * No's. 179 and 183. f Xos. 179, 186, and 187. 11281 2K2 252 in the waters thereof;" and the President/after reciting the section in qu0§tij$jj!and the section of the Salmon Act in which it is referred to, proceeds by his Proelapa^ion, to | warn all persons against entering the waters of Behring's Sea within the domain of the United States for the purpose of violating the provisions of the said section 1956, Revised Statutes," &c. I am directed by Marquis of Salisbury to request that, in laying the inclosed papers before Lord Knutsford, you will point out to his Lordship that the Act and Proclamation, taken strictly, do no more than assert the rights of the United States in their territorial waters. In fact, the discussions in the Senate and the House of Representatives, recorded in Inclosure 4 to Mr. Edwardes' despatch of the 25th ultimo, show that the majority in the Senate desired to avoid committing themselves by any words in the 'Act to an interpretation of the Treaty rights of the United States in. Behring's Sea, and that the House of Representatives acquiesced in that intention. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE: - No. 191. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, April 13, 1889. WITH reference to Mr. Edwardes' despatch of the 15th ultimo, I have to request that you will report to me, for the information of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, what is the present position of the appeal in the case of the steam-ship ef~W. P. Sayward," last reported on in Sir L. West's despatch of the 15th September," 1888. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 192. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 16.) My Lord, Washington, April 2, 18.89. ALTHOUGH the Bill introduced by Mr. Dunn into the House of Representatives to amend section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better protection of the fur seals and salmon fisheries of Alaska, and for other purposes, did not become' law, I think it right to submit a Report as to the proceedings in the House which took place in regard to it, on account of its connection with the Act passed on the 2nd. March for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska. The first section of Mr. Dunn's Bill related to the leasing to any person or Company, by the Secretary of the Treasury, of the right to take fur-seals on certain islands. The second section extended to all the waters of Behring's Sea. The prohibition contained in section 1956 of the Revised Statutes to kill fur-bearing animals (except to those authorized), and calls on the President to issue a Proclamation every year warning all persons against entering the waters of the Behring's Sea for that purpose; and to cause vessels of the United States to police those waters, to arrest all found in such illegal hunting, and to seize their vessels, &c. The other sections referred to the protection of salmon in Alaska waters. The Bill was referred to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and reported back by Mr. Dunn. The Report, copy of which is herewith inclosed, is most interesting, and gives the result of investigation into the subject of the fur-seal fisheries- of Alaska, and of the leases granted by the Government to persons or Companies for the rights of taking fur-bearing animals in those parts, &c. Mr. Dunn opened the discussion on the Bill by reviewing the rights of the United States in the waters of Alaska, which were acquired by the Treaty with Russia in 186?; Every right, every privilege, every immunity which, he said, Russia had had in the territory of Alaska, the United States now have. Chief among the interests acquired' by the United States by their purchase from Russia was the seal rookery of the Pribyloff Islands. He then went on to give an account of the lease held by the Alaska Commercial yyff1ffiffilfl'JJP-yy<nff1r**ppl<1*'tAI'%1 w^*P^»*5ni«M'.i es bbi jflwiwrim Company of the amount of seals-allowed to be killed under, its provisions, and of the amount of revenues obtained by the United States from this territorial-acquisition,-■■ j .It;-was.;most: impoitanty:he said, that-the seas, should be-patrolled by .United States' vessels,.and that-unlawful hunters should- knoWr.that if.found they will be arrested and their vessels seized. Several vessels had thus been seized last season, the legality of the seizure being contested on the grounds that the United States' Government had no jurisdiction over that sea. The Courts had sustained the right of jurisdiction of the Government over ?$he sea, arid their~rigirt to protect the "fisheries. If there had been any "leniency in releasing the seized vessels on the part of the Executive, it was pending some negotiations about the Eastern Fisheries question. However, in no case have' the rights of the United States been waived. The State Department has taken no decision conceding that the Behring's Sea is an open sea. The Committee have been satisfied that the policing of the sea must be more rigid, and that no indulgence must be shown to violators of the law. The existence of the injUaJbitants of. the Alentian Islands and of other parts in the United States' possessions in those latitudes depends on the continuation of the legitimate killing of seals. They get aUV their means of existence from those employed in it. The Committee have therefore considered it advisable that the President should issue a Proclamation yearly, warning all persons from entering Behring's Sea with the intention of violating tbe existing laws; and, moreover, he should be called upon to see to the closer patrolling of that sea. If this be not done the seal rookeries will be open to every one, and the herds of seals will, not last.three years. No Government would wish for this result. On the contrary, it is understood that other Governments are more than willing that the seals should be protected. The United States' Government have but to be firm, positive, and unmistakable in their policy. • Mr. Dingley also spoke strongly in favour of the Bill, the most noteworthy portion • of his speech being that in which he refers to the claim of Russia, before the cession by her of Alaska to the United States, to exclusive jurisdiction in the Behring's Sea, to the controversy that took place between Russia and the United States when the former attempted to extend that jurisdiction, and to the Treaties between Russia and the United States and between Russia and Great Britain, whereby the rights of Russia were recognized to control the Behring's Sea north of 55°. Several amendments were offered to the Bill, which was ultimately recommitted, the last stage it reached before Congress expired. f&* As I had the honour to . report to your Lordship, in my despatch of the 23rd ultimo, the House seeiug that Mr. Dunn's Bill could not possibly pass before the closing of Congress, added an amendment to the Senate Bill (which was ultimately accepted, and the Bill was passed) in the shape of an addition of a section 3 of the same-import-as-section 2 in Mr. Dunn's Bill, and it has been in response to this amendment of the House that the President has issued his Proclamation of the 22nd March. I have, &c. (Signed) H. E. EDWARDES. No. 193. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, April 18, 1889. . I HAVE laid, before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 10th instant, in which you call attention to the Proclamation issued by President Harrison on the 22nd ultimo for the protection of the fur seals in Behring's Sea, and to the Act recently passed by the United States' Congress on which that Proclamation is based. In view of the previous action of the United States' authorities on the spot, and of the meaning which may be attached by the Government of the United States to the words "all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea," employed in section 3 of the Act, Lord Knutsford suggests that an intimation should be made to that Government, that Her Majesty's Government cannot require the masters of British vessels, when fishing in Behring's Sea beyond the 3-mile limit, to recognize the law of the United States. In reply, I am to request that you will state to his Lordship that Sir J. Pauncefote, 254 who has been appointed to succeed Lord Sackville as Her Majesty's Representative at Washington, left London for his post on the 13th instant. It would, in Lord Salisbury's opinion, be advisable to wait until he has had time to examine into the question on the spot, and to report upon the situation, before making any communication to the United States' Government on the subject. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 194. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. (Extract.) Foreign Office, April 18, 1889. IT will be seen, on reference to the correspondence respecting the seizure of Canadian schooners by United States' Revenue cutters in Behring's Sea, that Mr. Bayard, in a letter addressed to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington on the 12th April, 1887,* a copy of which accompanied the letter from this Department of the 5th May of that year, stated that " the laws of the United States regulating the killing of fur seals have been in force for upwards of seventeen years, and, prior to the seizure of last summer, but a single infraction is known to have occurred, and that was promptly punished," On the other hand, Lord Lansdowne, in his despatch of the 27th November, 1886,f of which a copy was forwarded in your letter of the 4th January, 1887, states : " This is, as far as I have been able to ascertain, the first occasion upon which claims of the kind now advanced have been enforced. Sealing-vessels from British Columbia have for some years past frequented the waters of Behring's Sea without molestation." Lord Salisbury observes, however, that, in the Minute by the Department of Marine and Fisheries, inclosed in Lord Stanley's despatch of the 3rd August, 1888 (of which a copy was forwarded in your letter of the 18th of that month), it is stated that, by the proposed arrangement for a close time, " Canada would lose the enjoyment of a lucrative right long possessed, and this loss would be fatal to the prosecution of the seal industry." In Lord Salisbury's opinion it would be interesting, with a view to possible further negotiations, to know for how long, and to what extent, Canadian vessels have been in the habit of killing seals in the waters of Behring's Sea before 1886. 1 am to request that, in laying this letter before Secretary Lord Knutsford, you will move him to endeavour to obtain such statistical information bearing on these points as can be furnished by the Canadian Government. No. 195. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 20.) Sir, Downing Street, April 20, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 11th instant, transmitting copies of despatches from Her Majesty's Charge d'Affaires at Washington relative ta the Act of the United States' Congress of the 2nd March, 1889, providing for the protection of the salmon fisheries of Alaska, and the Proclamation which has been issued by the President of the United States in pursuance of its provisions. In reply, I am to acquaint you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, that Lord Knutsford, while accepting the construction put upon the Act and Proclamation in your letter, would have been glad if an opportunity could have been found of placing that construction officially on record. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. See Inclosure 2 in No. 3/ f See Inclosure 1 in No. 22. No. 196. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 30.) Sir, Downing Street, April 29, 1889. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, with reference to your letter of the 18th instant, a copy of a despatch which he has addressed to the Governor-General of Canada inquiring as to the extent to which British Columbian vessels were engaged in seal hunting in Behring's Sea prior to 1886. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure in No. 196. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. My Lord, Downing Street, April 27, 1889. I HA YE the honour to transmit to you, for communication to your Ministers, a copy of a letter from the Foreign Office requesting to be supplied with information as to the extent to which vessels belonging to British Columbia were engaged in seal hunting in Behring's Sea prior to 1886. I should be obliged if your Ministers could supply the information desired by the Marquis of Salisbury at an early date. I have, &c. (Signed) KNUTSFORD. No. 197. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 13.) My Lord, Washington, April 26, 1889. IN reply to your Lordship's despatch of the 13th instant, I have the honour to inform you that I learn on inquiry that the record of the appeal of the schooner "W. P. Sayward" was filed on the 3Uth October, 1888, but has not yet been printed. If it is not printed when the case is called the appeal will be dismissed. But it appears the case will not be reached for call for some three years, the business of the Supreme Court of the United States being, as I am told, nearly or quite four years in arrear. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 198. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received May 15.) Sir, ' Downing Street, May 14, 1889. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of the Annual Report of the Canadian. Department of Fisheries for the year 1888. I am to call attention to the remarks at p. 241 as to the seal-hunting in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. >56 Inclosure in No. 198. _j$0W#e . . Return showing the Number of Vessels, Boats, and Men engaged in the Marine Fur Fishery of British Columbia, with the Products and Value, for the Season of 1888.,;.; Number Number Total Total Names of Vessels. Names of Owners. Tonnage. Number of Boats. Number of Men. of Seals • in British Columbia. of Seals - in Behring's Sea. Number or Value of Seals. Dollars. Penelope .. .. J. J. Gray 69 5 20 805 900 1,705 17,050 Mary Ellen A. McLean .. 69 14 30 1,410 1,937 3,347 33,470 Juanita .. •. Hall and Gospel 40 13 28 177 1,017 1,194 11,940 Mountain Chief B. Jacobson .. •. 26 6 10 400 825 1,225 12,250 San Jose •. .. J.S.Lee 52 4 16 107 107 1,070 Sapphire .. •. E. B. Moroni 124 9 22 1,200 1,200 12,000 Viva .. Came and Munsie .. 92 5 21 806 2,069 2,875 28,750 Black Diamond Gutman and Frank .. 81 9 19 231 863 1,096 10,960 Mary Taylor J. D. VVarran .. 42 13 24 392 392 3,920 Hcleyon .. I'^y; American 61 6 24 17 17 170 Triumph D.'McLean .. 97 12 9 ,. 2,470 2,470 24,700 0. S. Fowler Wm. Beudt .. 34 2 12 230 230 2,300 Annie C. Moore .. Chas. Hackett 112 7 22 715 715 7,150 Lilv Gutman and Frank .. 68 22 20 93 93 930 Pathfinder .. .. Carne and Munsie . • 66 9 21 600 G50 1,250 12,500 Adele F. Rutz 50 8 19 392 822 1,214 12,140 Rosey Olsen •• Wm. Olsen S3 3 13 100 500 600 6,000 Annie Jas. Lafflin 25 3 11 156 1,039 1,105 11,950 Mag°ieMc. John Dodd 71 5 20 125 1,299 1,424 14,240 Favourite .. • • Chas. Spring Total 79 12 .27 300 1,834 - 2,134 Frr^340 .. • • 244,830 Estimate of skins pur ;hased from Indians .. 3,500 3,500 . 35,000 sea otter-skins purchased from In iians .. 100 100 7,500 ,, hair seals purchased from Indians ».• 3,500 3,500 2,625 Schooner " O. S. Fowler," walrus-skins 21 21 378 „ „ 250 ivory, at 40 c. ' products •• .» .. •• ■• 100 Gr and total marine furs am " •• •• 280,433 The decrease in the fur seal catch in Behring's Sea is still more noticeable; it was caused principally by the unsettled state of affairs with the American Government, several of the schooners being afraid to enter these waters at the risk of seizures. A great deal has been written on the life and habits of the fur seal. It is contended by some that all the fur seal in the North Pacific have their rookeries on St. Paul and St. George Islands in Behring's Sea. Others claim that many of the fur seals of the Pacific never enter Behring's Sea, but pup on large kelp fields in the ocean, and may perhaps have regular hauling grounds outside of Behring's Sea. Extracts from a Circular of C. M. Lamsen and Co., of London, England, will give the reader some idea of where the fur seals are caught. From October 1886 to January 1888 the following number of skins were sold:— Seal-skins. North-West Pacific Coast .. .. .. .. .. .. 43,687 Lobus Island . Alaska Copper Island Japan Cape Horn . South Sea 30,463 204,033 100,880 9,856 6,926 200 -396,045- It has been estimated .that 16,000,000 seals haul out. annually on St. Paul/and 3,000,000 on St. George Islands. The Commercial Alaska Company controls these and other islands by lease from the American and Russian Governments. I am of opinion that many, fur seal pup on kelp fields along the British Columbia coast. I have had reliable information from practical hunters and fishermen who bear me out on this point. Morris Moss, of Victoria, states that during the year 1870 he was engaged trading on the coast near Bella Bella during the months of March and April, when he saw hundreds of fur seal pups from S to 5 months old, which had become separated from their mothers, and on accotmt-of-a heavy storm were blown on shore and caught by the natives. Captain Alexander McLean, of Victoria, states that he killed a number of fur seal pups off Cape Cook, which had likewise been blown ashore during a storm. James G. Swan's Report for 1880 and 1S83 goes to show that the Indians of Cape Flattery SH2EE 257 capture fur seal pups each season, and keep them as pets around the camps. It is impossible that these pups may have come from Behring's Sea at that age, as Mr. Elliott states .they do not leave the islands before the month of November, and those that Mr. Swan speaks of are caught early in the spring. The majority of our hunters contend that there are over 7 per cent, of pups in the entire catch of fur seals on the coast; while in Behring's Sea the catch does not exceed 1 per cent. But they cannot deny the fact that over 60 per cent, of the entire catch of Behring's Sea is made up of female seals. No. 199. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 3.) My Lord, . Washington, May 24, 1889. 1 HAVE the honour to inform your Lordship that the steamer " Rush," of the United States' Revenue Service, has been ordered to Behring's Sea in order to protect the fur-bearing animals in the territory of Alaska or in the waters thereof, in accordance with section 1956 of the Revised Statutes. The Revenue steamer " Bear," now fitting at San Francisco, will shortly follow the " Rush," in order to assist her in this work. (Signed) I have, &c. J. PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 199. Extract from the " Washington Post" of May 24, 1889. The Alaskan Seal Fisheries.—Secretary Windom yesterday signed the sailing orders of the Revenue-steamer " Rush," directing that she sail immediately upon receipt of her instructions to Ounalaska, and then to cruize diligently in Behring's Sea for the purpose of "warning all persons against entering such waters for the purpose of violating section 1956 of the Revised Statutes, and arresting all persons, and seizing all vessels, found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the laws of the United States therein." Section 1956, Revised Statutes, referred to above, provides that " no person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska territory, or in the waters thereof; and every person guilty thereof shall, for each offence, be fined not less than 200 dollars nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both, and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited; but the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable, or orther fur-bearing animal, except fur-seal, under such regulations as he may prescribe, and it shall be the duty of the Secretary to prevent the killing of any fur-seal, and to provide for the execution of the provisions of this section until it is otherwise provided by law, nor shall he grant any special privileges under this section." The Commanding Officer of the " Rush " is also furnished with copies of the Act of the 2nd March, 1889, and the President's Proclamation of the 21st March, 1889, regarding the protection of the seal and salmon fisheries of Alaska, and instructed to enforce their provisions. The " Rush " is now at San Francisco ready for sea, and will sail immediately upon receipt of the orders, which were mailed at Washington yesterday afternoon. The Revenue-steamer M Bear," which is now fitting out at San Francisco for an expedition to Point Barrow, Alaska, has also been designated to assist in the protection of the Alaskan fisheries, and will follow the | Rush "in a short time. Her orders are now being prepared at the Treasury Department. [128] 2 L 258 No. 200. Consul-General Booker to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 8.) My Lord, New York, June 28, 1889. I HAVE the honour to inclose extracts, for your Lordship's perusal, from the New York " Evening Post" of yesterday, containing an interesting letter on. the Behring's Sea question. 1 have, &c. (Signed) WM. LANE BOOKER. Inclosure in No. 200. Extract from the New York "Evening Post" of June 27, 1889. The Behring's Sea Question. To the Editor of the " Evening Post." Sir, Salem, Massachusetts, June 21, 1889. SINCE the rejection of the Treaty of February 1888 with Great Britain, the public has heard very little of fishery troubles on the old debatable ground of tbe north-west Atlantic, but there is every prospect that the absence—obviously a merely temporary absence—from public discussion of tbe well-gnawed bone of contention will, in a measure, be made good by taking up as a topic the analogous question pending between the United States and Great Britain concerning the seal fisheries in the north Pacific, or, as our statesmen and writers prefer, for a very shrewd reason, to say, in "Behring's Sea." Several British vessels were seized in 1886 and 1887 by United States' Revenue- cruizers for sealing in Behring's Sea (a part of the Pacific Ocean, as I shall show presently), far outside of the 3-mile shore belt, and these vessels were condemned by the United States' District Court at Sitka. So far as I am aware, there is no official publication showing the position taken by our Government in this matter, so that we must fall back on statements in the press. The "New York Herald" of the 13th October, 1887, published what purported to be a verbatim copy of the " brief understood to have been prepared at Washington and recently filed in the Court at Sitka h\ Mr. A. K. Delaney as counsel for the United States' Government." The defendant's name is not given there, but obviously it is the brief against one of the British vessels seized in 1887, and probably substantially the same brief was used against all of them. In a leader in the same issue the "Herald" refers to this brief as that against certain British vessels charged with violating our rights. There is no reason to doubt the genuineness of this paper, and in the absence of other evidence, we may take it as a trustworthy guide to the position taken by our Government. It is there stated that the case is based on section 1956 of the Ptevised Statutes of the United States, providing that "no person shall kill any otter, &c, or other fur-bearing animal, within the limits of Alaska Territory or in the waters thereof;" that the offence is charged tohavebeen committed " 130 miles north of the Island of Ounalaska, and, therefore, in the main waters of that part of the Behring's Sea ceded by Russia to the United States." It is further stated that the defendants demur on the ground that the Court has no jurisdiction, as the alleged offence was committed beyond the limit of a marine league from the shores of Alaska, and that the Act under which the defendants were arrested is unconstitutional in so far as it restricts the free navigation of the Behring's Sea for fishing and sealing purposes beyond the limits of a marine league from shore; that the demurrer presents squarely the questions:— 1. The jurisdiction of the United States over Behring's Sea. 2. The power of Congress to legislate concerning those waters. Then follows the argument, opening as follows:— "The fate of the second of these propositions depends largely upon that of the first, for if the jurisdiction and dominion of the United States as to these waters be not sustained, the restrictive acts of Congress must fall " This argument offers great temptation to submit it to criticism in detail, but I shall confine myself to the main issue. •~™^-"^'-'^Yl'Wtf "-'■"-""" lr>,'"''m°!"'-WH™M-'''''"1'-*,',"r°l'T^ r 259 It states that international law recognizes seas and waters of a certain kind as " landlocked or inland," and accords dominion and jurisdiction over them to individual nations. Quotations from the text-books are then given to define the physical conditions required by international law to constitute such landlocked or inland sea. These conditions may be summed up in Vattel's axiom: "It must be entirely surrounded by the territory of the nation claiming jurisdiction, and must have no other communication with the ocean than by a channel of which that nation may take possession." All perfectly true. The trouble is merely in the " application on 't" to the case in point. The boundaries of Behring's Sea are correctly given. Among them are enumerated the Peninsula of Kamtchatka and Eastern Siberia, and then it is said, " It will not be denied that at the time the United States acquired the territory of Alaska the waters of the Behring's Sea washed only the shores of Russian territory I" Precisely. But, as Russia ceded to us only a part of such shores, and as she retained as her own a great part of them, we are not in possession of all the shores, and, consequently, we cannot claim " dominion and jurisdiction " over Behring's Sea under the above doctrine. Now as to the other condition shown to be the second requisite of a closed or landlocked sea—absence of communication with the ocean, except by a channel of which we, as claimants of dominion, might take possession. That is a purely geographical question, to be settled by reference to authentic Maps or Charts. The reliability of the Charts issued by our Hydrographic Office at Washington will not be questioned, so let us consult its Chart No. 68, edition of May 1888, entitled "Behring's Sea and Arctic Ocean." Let us, for brevity's sake, assume, what is, however, not true in fact, that the chain of islands generally called the Aleutian, as far as they go, answers all the requirements of international law as an inclosing barrier. We then need only examine the sea to the westward of the most western of said islands, the one called Atton. The said Chart shows only two islands between Atton and the coast of Kamtchatka, and these intervening islands are Russian territory. The respective positions are laid down in said Chart as follows:— Atton (most western United States' territory), west ex o , o , tremity of 52 57 N. 172 30 E. Copper Island (nearest land eastward), south-east ex tremity of .. .. 54 35 N. 168 05 E. Copper Island (north-west), extremity of .. 54 55 N. !6<7 24 E. Behring's Island, nearest land eastward to Copper Island , . . . Point nearest to Copper Island, Cape Chitron .. 54 55 N. 166 37 E. Point nearest to Kamtchatka coast, Sea Lion's Head .. 55 16 N. 165 40 E. Kamtchatka, point nearest to Behring's Island 56 06 N. 163 20 E. The usual method of nautical calculation shows the shortest distances between the above points to be as follows, to wit, between :- Atton and Copper Island ., .. Copper Island and Behring's Island Behring's Island and Kamtchatka 183 "I "Nautical miles and 27 > ■ a fraction over 23 J in every case. The narrowest of these channels would admit of the passage of a fleet of over 100 vessels sailing abreast in a single line, even if deployed with a quarter of a mile between each two vessels! Are these channels such as a nation can be supposed to be able to take possession of? " In all other parts of the world our people have always been the strenuous champion of the freedom of the seas, and have even claimed (see Senate, Rep., No. 1683, '49 Cong. 2 sess., p. 5) that straits as narrow as the Gut of Canso (1 to 1^ miles wide) leading to seas accessible by other channels of sufficient width, were free to our use. On this principle every one of the many channels between the Aleutian Islands, and connecting the sea south of them with that north of them, is free to all the world. The best of all of them, the Amoughta Pass, is about 41 miles wide ! Imagine the ridicule, the vials of wrath that our publicists and diplomatists Would pour out on any luckless wight who, stealing our thunder, should undertake to prove that the Gulf of St. Lawrence, for instance, was by international law a British closed sea, landlocked and inland. And yet logically his position would be infinitely stronger than ours is, for that gulf, insignificant in extent compared with Behring's Sea, is actually inclosed by British territory, and has only three channels of communication with the Atlantic ! [128] 2 L 2 260 There is a story of a naval captain who, on being overhauled by his superiors for not returning a salute fired in honour of his flag, replied that he had a whole number of good reasons for the omission, to wit: firstly, having no powder, and who was thereupon immediately cut short by the remark, "That will do!" You may say the Attorney of the United States himself has rested his case on the ground that Behring's Sea is a landlocked and inland sea. The contrary has now been demonstrated; consequently the matter is settled, and nobody cares to hear any more on so tedious a subject. But there are always plenty of good people in the world to whom that would not be conclusive by any means, and who can only be convinced by having every one of the other allegations, however hopelessly involved in the preceding, or however absurd or irrelevant in themselves, disproved separately and distinctly. These allegations are, partly in express terms, partly by implication, that (1) Behring's Sea and the Pacific Ocean are separate and different seas; (2) that Behring Sea is not a part of the Pacific, and Behring's Sea was the only interior sea of the North American coast, and was held by Russia; (3) that Russia by the Treaties of 1824 and 1825 (with the United States and Great Britain respectively) abandoned her prior claim to jurisdiction over the Pacific, but did not surrender jurisdiction over Behring's Sea, and that consequently such jurisdiction descended to the United States through the cession to us of all Russia's rights by the Treaty of 1867. In support of these assertions, the "argument" asks triumphantly if there was a challenge of Russia's jurisdiction over Behring's Sea, why was it not settled in the Treaties ? Why was a ten years' limit of mutually free navigation in the interior seas, gulfs, harbours, and creeks of each other on the North American coast accepted by the United States and by Great Britain, if Behring's Sea—declared by the argument to be the only interior sea— was part of the Pacific or belonged to the high seas, and, therefore, free to all ? Why was the term inland sea used ? The answer to it all is the same as that to so many other conundrums—"The boy lied." Behring's Sea was and is a part of the Pacific. The term Behring's Sea was unknown at the time the Treaties of 1824 and 1825 were made, and, therefore, was not, and could not be, used in them. When a distinctive name was employed for that sea, they called it in those days "The Sea of Kamtchatka"— the argument itself admits this by saying " formerly known as the Sea of Kamtchatka." The term Behring's Sea is absent not only from these Treaties, but from all the prior diplomatic correspondence and from all contemporaneous writings. I could fill a page with the mere titles of the encyclopaedias, gazetteers, and geographical reference books, &c, published up to 1825, and for many years after, in which I have looked, and looked in vain, for Behring's Sea. The name Behring, in a variety of spellings, occurs in all, as that of a navigator, of a bay on our coast (but far to the east of Behring's Sea), of an island, of a strait, but never, until long after 1825, as that of the sea, now so called. The present application of that name is of much more recent origin, and its general adoption has been gradual and slow; but that this separate name should or could divest this sea of its old quality of forming part of the Pacific Ocean is an idea unknown to the scientific world, Look into any old or modern reference book, under " Behring's Sea" and " Pacific Ocean," and you will always find the first defined as a part of the Pacific Ocean, and this as beginning at Behring's Strait, thus including the first. I found but one exception to this, viz., the second edition of "Appleton's Encyclopaedia" (1873), which says that the Pacific is bounded on the north by the Aleutian Islands (Behring's Sea not being properly oceanic in its charac'er), and this is in contradiction to the definition of Behring's Sea, in the same edition, that being said to be part of the Pacific. However, the earliest edition of the same work (1858) makes the Pacific extend from Behring's Strait to the Antarctic circle, and it again proves my assertion. Our own early official Charts, viz., Pilot Charts of Lieutenant M. F. Maury, United States' Navy (United States' Hydrographic Office, 1850), sheets Nos. 2 and 3, series "A," covering the present Behring's Sea, are entitled " North Pacific ;" the name Behring's Sea does not occur in them; but on No. 2 the names of " Sea of Ochotsk " and " Sea of Sachalien " are given to those divisions of the Pacific. In the official documents and in the Congressional debates about giving aid to Perry McD. Collins (February 1862, et seq.) for his telegraph between Asia and America viet Behring's Straits, enacted the 1st July, 1864, Pacific Ocean is the term generally, if not exclusively, used when reference is made to the sea now known as Behring's. But to make assurance doubly sure, I applied for an opinion on the question to the most eminent living authority in matters geographical, Professor Dr. H. Supan, editor of " Petermann's Mitteilungen," who likewise says that all geographers consider Behring's Sea a part of the Pacific. I can submit the correspondence if desired. 261 A look at a Map or Chart of the region in question (which please to recollect embraces not only the American shore north of the Peninsula of Alaska, but that to the eastward and southward of it, whether Russian, British, or of the United States) will show that so far from Behring's Sea being the only inland sea there, this region is particularly full of peninsulas and whole archipelagoes of islands, and is consequently also full of interior seas, gulfs, harbours, and creeks, and it is for that very reason that they were made. the subject of express stipulations in the said Treaties. No less untrue than tbe preceding assertion of the argument about the " only inland sea " is the other, that tbe Treaties of 1824 and 1825 were a sort of give-and-take arrangement as regards marine dominion ; that Russia abandoned a part of it only, and had tbe balance conceded to her. Secretary Adams, in his instructions to our Minister at St. Petersburgh of tbe 22nd July, 1823 (see American State Papers, " Foreign Relations," second series, folio edition, vol. v, p. 436), after setting forth Russia's claims as including the right to interdict the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the coasts of Asia, from 45° north (round) to 51° north of the American Continent, says emphatically:— " The United States can admit no part of these claims. Their right of navigation and of fishery is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the South Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions which, so far as Russia's rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude, and have no existence on the coast of America." And when you remember that in those days there was no such division of the Pacific between Pacific and Behring's Sea as we, or those who do the talking for us, now claim, it is perfectly clear that we and Great Britain, in the respective Treaties of 1824 and 1825, carried our point for free navigation and fishery to its fullest extent by having it acknowledged therein as extending to " any part of the great ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea." And further to show that this was also Russia's view of the meaning of the said Treaties, let me refer to a passage in Bancroft's i History of the Pacific State," vol. xxviii, p. 583. In 1842 the Russian American Company urged the Russian Government to send armed cruizers for the preservation of Behring's Sea as a mare clausum, on account of the great extent of American whale-fishing there; but the Russian Ministry replied that the Russo-American Treaty gave to Americans the right to engage in fishing over the whole extent of the Pacific Ocean. It is hardly necessary to say anything more. To assert in the face of all this that our part of Behring's Sea is a closed sea, is nothing else than a parody on the old headland- line doctrine, a line, in this case some 900 miles long, from Cape Prince of Wales to Atton, and inclosing a "bay" stretching, at its greatest extent, over about 30 degrees of longitude. This may recommend itself to lovers of a "big thing," but legally and logically it is no less absurd than Russia's still longer headland-line of 1821, which Secretary Adams wiped out. Perhaps it may be pleaded on behalf of the Judge at Sitka, the Hon. Leff. Dawson, that he is only a District Judge,, and that he was misled by the Washington brief; but what Gan be said for our superior officials, the Secretaries of State and of the Treasury ? Were and are they too misinformed on the geography, the history, and even the law governing these cases ? From time to time we have been told by the newspapers that the British vessels seized have been released, and then again that it has not been done. It seems to be all a muddle. The newspapers also say we must, in self defence, prevent any one but the Alaska Commercial Company from sealing in Behring's Sea, because that Company pays our Government a handsome interest on the cost to us of Alaska; that the seals there are all ours because bred on territory of ours, and that free sealing would soon exterminate these animals. Imagine such sophisms and such untruth submitted to the Supreme Court. The fur-seal are not all, or even nearly all, bred on our territory. Mr. H. W. Collins, in his Report on the seal islands of Alaska, published officially as part of the United States' Census of 1880, vol. xiii, No '12, Part VIII, says, on p. 6, that they also breed on Copper and Behring's Islands, both Russian, and both leased by our Alaska Commercial Company; and on p. 113, that 48,504 of these animals were taken on these Rusaaa islands. But if tbe seals were all American-born it would make no difference in law, as creatures roaming about the high seas are no man's property, except his who catches them. That | free sealing " might entail extermination of these creatures in the North Pacific, as it has already done elsewhere, is probable, but this gives us no right to make preventive laws, even of the mildest kind, for others ttan American citizens and for 262 localities other than our own territory. Even the Washington brief admits this. International agreement, and not the ipse dixit of any single nation, is the proper remedy, if there be one. That free sealing might, and probably would, injure financially an American corporation, eventually, perhaps, even our Government, may be deplorable, but will not be accepted as our justification for interference with the rights of other nations, involving the infliction of injustice on individual foreigners. The whole course of our Government, its action as well as its inaction, in this matter is open to severe criticism. It looks as if, in this matter, we repudiated all our traditional and sterling maxims of international obligations, as if we had substituted for our old trusty and trusted moral compass a new one, and that one subject to the most astounding variations, according to locality—variations eclipsing in scope any similar performance of the mariner's compass. Within certain moderate limits, there may be as good local reason for the variations of the moral compass as for those of the mariner's instrument; but an absolute turning end for end, an inversion of north and south, of right and wrong, the claim that a general principle of law has one effect here and the opposite effect elsewhere, will not be accepted, in either navigation or law, by either experts or merely common-sense people. When the captain finds that the card of his compass calls that north which the sun in the heavens proves to be the south, you cannot fool the captain into believing that compass. He will tell you that, though the needle is as right as ever, somebody has been "monkeying" with the card. He will at once correct the falsification. The sooner Uncle Sam goes and does likewise in this Pacific contention the better for all concerned, and particularly for the international reputation of our country as an upright, a fair-dealing, a just people. (Signed) Robert Rayner. No. 201. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received July 27.) Sir, Downing Street, July 27, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, with its inclosures, urging the desirability of such steps being taken as will secure reparation for the damages sustained by sealers of the Dominion, in consequence of the seizure of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea, and the withdrawal of the claim advanced by the Government of the United States to exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of that sea. As Lord Salisbury is aware that a considerable delay has occurred in the presentation of these claims, Lord Knutsford would suggest that the claims should be presented to the United States' Government at an early date, unless there are strong reasons of policy against this course. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 201. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, ' New Richmond, P. Q„ June 12, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence on the subject of the seizures of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward to your Lordship a copy of an approved Minute of my Privy Council concurring in a Report submitted by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, who deals fully with the whole question of these seizures, and strongly urges the desirability of such steps being taken by Her Majesty's Government as shall secure full reparation for the damages sustained by Canadian sealers, and the retraction of the claim advanced by the United States' Government to exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. 26S Inclosure 2 in No. 201. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the AtK June, 1839. ON a Report, dated the 27th May, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting the following resume and recommendation Tetating to the Canadian vessels - seized in or ordered away from the Behring's Sea by United States' authorities. So far back as the month of September 1886, the Canadian Government first called attention of the Imperial authorities to this action on the part of the United States, and in- a Minute of Council approved by your Excellency on the 29th November, 1886, the desire was then expressed that immediate reparation should be demanded for such wanton and unjustifiable acts. On the 29th November, 1887, a Minute of Council was approved by your Excellency, in which the revised claims of the owners of the schooners "Thornton " and " Carolena" are stated in detail, and directing that the claims should be forwarded to the Secretary of State for the Colonies for transmission to the United States' Government. On the 20th December, 1887, a further Minute of Council was adopted having reference to the claim of the owner of the schooner " Onward " and recommending that a claim for damages be forwarded in a similar manner to the Government of the United States. These vessels the Minister is informed are still laid up on the beach at Ounalaska, and are in an advanced stage of decay. On the 30th December, 1887, a subsequent Minute was adopted by the Privy Council, having reference to the claim of the owner of the schooner " Favorite," which vessel was, on the 2nd August, 1886, while sealing in Behring, ordered away by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Corwin " under threat of seizure. A claim for damages was also transmitted in this case in like manner as in others. A Report was adopted on the 30th December, 1S87, having reference to the seizure of the schooner "W. P. Sayward," 9th July, 1887; "Grace," 17th July, 1887; "Anna Beck," 2nd July, 1887; "Dolphin," 12th July, 1887; "Alfred Adams," 6th August, 1887; and "Ada," 25th August, 1887, and embodied the claims connected therewith which were recommended to be forwarded through the Imperial Government for immediate settlement. Further revised claims for personal damages, for illegal arrest and imprisonment were forwarded under an approved Minute of Council of the 12th January, 1888, to the Imperial Government in connection with the seizures in the year 1886, as follows:— Hans Guttormsen, master Henry Norman, mate James Ogilvie, master James Black, mate Daniel Munroe, master John Margotich, mate Schooner ". Thornton." Schooner " Carolena." Schooner " Onward." Dollars. 4,000 2,500 2,500 2,500 4,000 2,500 The personal claims of the masters and mates _of the vessels seized in 1887 were recommended for transmission by a Minute of Council of the 12th January, 1888, as follows:— Schooner " Dolphin.'' J. D. Warren, master John Reilly, mate George R. Ferey, master A. D. Laing, mate Louis Olsen, master Michael Keefe, mate .. William Petit, master Charles A. Ludberg, mate.. Schooner " W. P. Sayward." Schooner " Anna Beck." Schooner " Grace." Schooner " Ada." Dollars. 2,635 1,000 2,000 1,000 2,000 1,000 MKUBM 264 One vessel was released on the 15th May, 1888, under a bond, viz., the schooner " W. P. Sayward;" the owners of the other vessels (except the " Ada " for which no owner could be found) considered that the appraisement was largely in excess of the value of the vessels. The Marshal of the United States' Court was also of that opinion, and a reappraisement was sought from the American Government but refused. The Minister has recently been advised that the schooners " Grace," " Anna Beck," " Dolphin," and " Ada" were sold by direction of the United States' Government on the 26th March last, the cargoes, supplies, and outfits of all the seized vessels having been previously disposed of. The Minister further submits that in a despatch from the Colonial Office, under date the 29th March, 1888, stating that the Law Officers of the Crown were of the opinion that " in respect of the schooner ' Favorite,' warned to cease operations under threat of seizure, the simple question is whether the threat was intended to be put into force, and whether she bond fide ceased to fish in consequence. There can be little doubt that both questions would be answered in her favour, and in her case also, a claim should be pressed, though the measure of damages will be different from that in the case of the other vessels and would, in the absence of special circumstances, be the actual loss occasioned by reason of the interruption of tbe fishing." The same despatch referring to the cases of the " W. P. Sayward," " Grace," " Anna Beck," "Alfred Adams," "Dolphin," and " Ada," seized in the Behring's Sea during the season of 1887, says, upon the facts laid before the Law Officers, these seizures were, in their opinion, unwarranted, and the claims for compensation can be pressed. It may here be mentioned that in the case of the " Alfred Adams " the circumstances are somewhat exceptional. This vessel was seized, and ordered by the United States' authorities to report to the United States' Marshal at Sitka; instead of which the captain sailed for Victoria, thus escaping detention and loss further than that of being obliged to relinquish his sealing voyage. The Minister desires to draw attention to the concise and forcible presentation of the Canadian case against the United States contained in the despatch from his Lordship the Marquis of Salisbury to Sir Lionel Sackville West, under date the 10th September, 1887, wherein Lord Salisbury deals' with the claim set up by the late Administration of the United States to the authority of that country in the Behring's Sea, under the Treaty of Cession with Russia hereinafter mentioned, including those waters at a distance from land far in excess of the ordinary limit of maritime jurisdiction. The Marquis of Salisbury, in that despatch, remarks: "Nearly four months have elapsed without any definite information being furnished by the United States' Government, as to the grounds of the seizures. My predecessor instructed you on the 8th January last, to express to Mr. Bayard the concern of Her Majesty's Government at the delay, and to urge the immediate attention of the United States' Government to the action of the American authorities in their treatment of these vessels and of their masters and crews." And again: | Her Majesty's Government have carefully considered the transcript record of the judicial proceedings in the United States' District Court, in the several cases of the schooners ' Carolena,' j Onward,' and ' Thornton,' which were communicated to you in July, and were transmitted to me in your despatch No. 196 of the 12th of that month, and they cannot find in them any justification for the condemnation of those vessels;" and concluding his despatch his Lordship further stated: "Her Majesty's Government feel sure that in view of the considerations which I have set forth in this despatch, which you will communicate to Mr. Bayard, the Government of the United States will admit that the seizure and condemnation of these British vessels and the imprisonment of their masters and crews were not warranted by the circumstances, and that they will be ready to afford reasonable compensation to those who have suffered in consequence, and issue immediate instructions to their naval officers which will prevent a recurrence of these regrettable incidents." Three years have now almost passed since the American Government were apprised of the remonstrance on the part of the British Government against the claim set up to exclusive jurisdiction in the Behring's Sea, with practically no result other than the virtual and continual exclusion of Canadian sealers from those open waters by the Government of the United States. Constant inquiry has been made of the Canadian Government as to the present condition of the claims of British subjects in Canada for the damage and loss sustained by the unjustifiable action of the United States' authorities. The Minister regrets that he has been able to give no other answer to these inquiries >aoaare^T-^aT^nty|7rcfflfr...««,vnio,-3s.: HOTS3 265 than to say, that the claims are still being pressed upon the attention of the United States' Government, but that no settlement has been arrived at. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries is informed that the failure to obtain satisfaction has already resulted in the financial embarrassment and failure of Captain Warren, of Victoria, British Columbia, one of the owners most largely interested in the seized vessels : while the sealing industry, so far as Canada is concerned, which was heretofore prosecuted with considerable advantage to labour and capital, has become entirely paralyzed. He further observes that while the argument advanced by the British Governmeut touching the rights of British subjects in the open waters of Behring's Sea has not been met, recent expressions and actions on the part of officials and of the authorities hi the United States touching the Behring's Sea, taken with the seizures of British vessels already referred to, afford a reasonable ground for the belief that the Revenue-cutters of the United States' Government in the waters in question will continue to treat these waters as closed. Great damage has therefore not only been sustained, but is now being suffered, by British subjects in consequence of their not daring to risk their persons and property in these waters in the absence, not only of a settlement of the claims already existing, but without any positive assurance from the British Government that, in the event of loss or damage again occurring to them in the open waters of the Behring's Sea at the hands of the United States' authorities, ample redress will be obtained therefor. The Minister observes that the lease granted by the United States to the Alaska Commercial Company in August 1870 gave that Company the right to take seals on the Islands of St. George and St. Paul only. It appears that it is claimed by the United States' authorities that the supply on these islands began to diminish in consequence of the number killed and taken in the open sea.* In 1879 a Notice was published by the Treasury Department at Washington, calling attention to section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States for tbe purpose apparently of prohibiting American citizens from interfering with the rights of the Alaska Commercial Company under its Contract with the United States.f Notwithstanding the statement in the Report of the Committee of the House of. Representatives} hereinaiter referred to, "that American citizens respected the law and the published Notice of the Secretary of State of the Treasury, and made no attempt to take seas," the list of seizures appended to that Report§ shows that an American schooner was seizled in 1886 and seven American schooners were seized in 1887 for the violation of the section of the Revised Statutes mentioned in the Notice. The bold attempt of the United States to make Behring's Sea a mare clausum, occurred in 1886 by the seizure of the British schooners "Thornton," "Carolena,'' and I Onward." It will be remembered that in 1887 Mr. Bayard wrote to Sir L. S. Sackville West referring to the Alaskan waters and the Regulations and Orders to United States' vessels to protect them as follows :— " The Laws of the United States in this behalf-are contained in the Revised Statutes relating to Alaska in sections 1956 to 1971, and have been in force for upwards of seventeen years. "The question of instructions to Government vessels in regard to preventing the indiscriminate killing of fur-seals 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 themselves accordingly." The Minister is not aware that any information has been communicated by the Secretary of State Department of the United States' Government as promised, " so that British and other vessels visiting the waters in question could govern themselves accordingly," but the following Circular appears to have been issued iu Washington in the year 1888 :— | Treasury Department, Office of the Secretary, " Dear Sir, | Washington, D. C, March 5, 1 Referring to the Department's letter to you of the 16th March, 1886, concerning the scope of the jurisdiction of the United States over the waters of the territory of Alaska, and the prevention of the killing of fur-seals and other fur-bearing animals within such, and as described by Chapter 3 of Title 23 of the Revised Statutes, you are again requested to give publicity to the matter, so that any parties who may be contemplating the fitting out [128 * Report No 3883 H. It., 50 Congress, Session 2, Appendix (A), t Appendix (R), April 21, 1879. p. 5, Appendix (A). Report No. 3883 11. R., 50 vjonirress, Section 2, Appendix (C), Exhibit C. to above Report, 2 M 266 of expeditions to kill fur-seals in the said waters, may have due and timely notice of the requirements of the Statute in the premises, as construed by the Department. (Signed) "L. H. Maynakd, "Assistant Secretary "Collector of Customs, San Francisco, California." Attention is called to tbe last words of the foregoing Circular. The " construing of the Department" may be ascertained by the seizures under consideration. The Minister would further draw attention to the Report of the Governor of Alaska for the year 1888,* wherein he argues that the monopoly of the seal fishery in Behring's Sea will be lost if the Government of the United States does not assert exclusive jurisdiction beyond the 3-mile limit. In this Report, after expressing his fear that the British sealing-vessels will again visit the open waters of Behring's Sea, and capture seals, the Governor calls for an announcement of the " policy and determination of the Government in the matter of their protection." Subsequently, and during the 50th Session of the House of Representatives, the Committee on Marine and Fisheries was directed "to fully investigate and report upon the nature and extent of the rights and interests of the United States in the fur-seals and other fisheries in the Behring's Sea in Alaska; whether and to what extent the same had been violated ; and by whom: and what, if any, legislation is necessary for the better protection and preservation of the same." The Committee reportedt upholding the claim of the United States to jurisdiction over all waters and land included in the Treaty of Cession by Russia to the United States, and construing different Acts of Congress as completing the claim of national territorial rights to cover the open waters of Behring's Sea outside of the 3-mile limit. The concluding portion of tbe Report, among other things, states as follows:— "That the chief object of the purchase of Alaska was the acquisition of the valuable products of the Behring's Sea. "That at the date of the cession of Alaska to the United States, Russia's title to Behring's Sea was perfect and undisputed. "That by virtue of the Treaty of Cession the United States acquired complete title to all that portion of Behring's Sea situated within the limits prescribed by the Treaty. "The Committee herewith report a Bill J making necessary amendments of the existing Law relating to these subjects, and recommend its passage." Herewith appended is a copy of the Bill H. R. 12,432, introduced as directed by this Report, together with an extract from the "Congressional Record " relating to the same.§ The Proclamation of the President of the United States was issued on the 21st March, 1889, of which a copy is appended to this Report. || This Proclamation takes the place of the Notice already quoted, first reciting section 1,956 of the Revised Statutes and then section 3 of the Act, entitled "An Act to provide for the Protection of the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska,"^ which is as follows :— "Section 3. That section 1,956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea, and it shall be the duty of the President at a timely season in each year to issue his Proclamation and cause the same to be published for one month at least in one newspaper (if any such there be) published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific Coast warning all persons against entering the waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of the said section, and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize in the said waters and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be or to have been engaged in any violation of the Laws of the United States therein." Then follows the warning as in Appendix (marked E). The Minister desires to bring to the immediate notice of the British Government the foregoing to show that while the wrongs inflicted by the American authorities upon subjects of Her Britannic Majesty still go unredressed, instead of withdrawing from the position assumed by the United States in 1886, tbe Government of that country threatens to renew the illegal acts complained of. * Appendix (D), | Report of Governor of Alaska for fiscal year 1888." \ Report No. 38S3, 50 Congress, Section 2, Appendix (A), March 30, 1869 % Bill, H. R. 12,432. § Appendix (A). || Proclamation, March 21, 1889, Appendix (E). % Approved, March 2, 1S89. iTTt n iiifmifinaaa 267 Under these circumstances it is not surprising that tbe public mind in Canada has become excited if not alarmed by even the appearance of delay in obtaining full compensation for the injuries done to British subjects residing in this portion of the Empire. Adverting again to the Report of the Committee on Marine and Fisheries of the House of Representatives, the Minister does not deem it necessary to review all the conclusive answers which have been given to the ground taken by said Committee, and he is glad to recollect that the British Government has never entertained doubt regarding the absence of the sligtest justification for the seizure of the Canadian vessels. He may, however, be permitted to refer to the argument of the Committee of Marine and Fisheries before adverted to. The contention of the Committee was that the only question ever raised between Russia, England, and the United States regarding maritime jurisdiction in the Pacific had reference to a section of the coast of the North Pacific Ocean, and entirely remote from Behring's Sea. Upon this tbe Minister observes that the distinguished American jurist, Chancellor Kent, did not so construe the letter of Mr. Adams.* On the subject of mare clausum he says in his Commentaries :—f "The claim of dominion to close or narrow seas is still the theme of discussion and controversy. Puffendorf admits that in a narrow sea the dominion of it, and the right of fishing therein, may belong to the Sovereigns of the adjoining shores. " According to the current of modern authority, the general territorial jurisdiction extends into the sea as far as cannon-shot will reach and no farther, and this is generally calculated to be a marine league, and the Congress of the United States have recognized this limitation by authorizing the District Courts to take cognizance of all captures made within a marine league of the American shores." And with reference to the letter of Mr. Adams, he further says :— "The claim of Russia to sovereignty over the Pacific coast north of the 51st degree of latitude as a close sea was considered by our Government in 1882 to be against the rights of other nations." In Regulations under the Russian Ukase of 1821, which led to the correspondence referred to, Russia expressly pretends to grant exclusive commercial and fishing rights to Russian subjects "from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of northern latitude; also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring's Strait to the south cape of the Island of Urup, viz., to 45° 50' northern latitude." Criticizing this, Mr. Adams said :—J I To exclude the vessels of our citizens from the shores beyond the ordinary distance to which the territorial jurisdiction extends has excited still greater surprise." The letter of the 2nd April, 1822, from Mr. Poletica to Mr. Adams especially shows that the long controversy from lb22 to 1868 between the Russian and American Governments was not confined, as the Committee of Marine and Fisheries says, " to that section of the coast and waters of the North Pacific Qcean between the 51st parallel of north latitude and Mount St. Elias and east of the 141st meridian," since in it, after, endeavouring to prove the title of Russia to the north-west coast of America from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude, Mr. Poletica says :— "In the same manner the great extent of the Pacific Ocean at the 41st degree of latitude cannot invalidate the right which Russia may have of considering that part of the ocean as close. But as the Imperial Government has not thought fit to take advantage of that right, all further discussion on this subject would be idle." Reference can again be made to the letter of Mr. Adams to Mr. Poletica,§ wherein he stated :— "With regard to the suggestion that the Russian Government might have justified lhe exercise of sovereignty over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores, it may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea in latitude 51° north is not less than 90° of longitude, or 4,000 miles." And to the letter of Mr. Adams to Mr. Middleton, || the American Representative in Russia, wherein he remarks :— " From the tenour of the Ukase, the pretensions of the Imperial Government extend [1281 * March 30, 1882. f " Kent's Commentaries,'' vol. i, pp. 29 and 30, 13th edition. % Mr. Adams to Mr. Poletica, February 25, 1822. § March 20, 18!2. || July 22, 1823. 2 M 2 ■WBW 268 to an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the 45th degree of north latitude, on the Asiatic coast, to the latitude of 51° north, on the western coast of the American continent, and they assume the right of interdicting the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast. "The United States can admit no part of these claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the Peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exemptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions, which, so far as Russian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude and have no existence on the continent of America." Subsequently Mr. Forsyth, Secretary of State at Washington, wrote Mr. Dallas,* from which is extracted tbe following passage :— | The United States, in agreeing not to form new establishments to the north of latitude 54° 40' north, made no acknowledgment of the right of Russia to the territory above that line. If such an admission had been made, Russia, by the same construction of the Article referred to, must have acknowledged the right of the United States to the territory south of the designated line. But that Russia did not so understand the Article is conclusively proved by her having entered into a similar Agreement (1825) with Great Britain, and having, in fact, acknowledged in that instrument the right of possession of the same territory by Great Britain. The United States can only be considered as acknowledging the right of Russia to acquire by actual occupation a just claim to unoccupied lands above the latitude 54° 40' north, and even this is mere matter of inference, as the Convention of 1824 contains nothing more than a negation of the right of the United States to occupy new points within those limits. " Admitting that this inference is just, and was in contemplation of the parties to the Convention, it cannot follow that the United States ever intended to abandon the just right acknowledged by the 1st Article to belong to them under the law of nations, to frequent any part of the unoccupied coast of North America for the purpose of fishing or trading with the natives." The Committee having endeavoured to show that the correspondence between 1822 down to the Treaty of Cession with Russia had no reference to Behring's Sea, were compelled to reconcile with their contention the opinion of Mr. Secretary Boutwell, of the Treasury Department at Washington, given on the 9th April, 1872, wherein he held that the taking of fur-seals was not unlawful unless attempted within a marine league of the shore. Accordingly, Mr. Boutwell was called upon to explain his previous letter, and this he has attempted to do.f It will be observed, however, that, while Mr. Boutwell now claims that his letter of 1872 referred only to that portion of the Pacific south of the Aleutian range of islands, the letter is in reply to a direct question from the Collector at San Francisco, founded upon an extract from a newspaper. This newspaper expressly states that parties in Australia are fitting out for an expedition for the capture of fur-seals " in Behring's Sea." The Collector incloses this extract to Mr. Boutwell, and suggests that, as the seals reach St. Paul and St. George Islands uniformly by the Ounimak Pass and through the narrow straits near that pass, that a cutter be placed in the region of Ounimak Pass, where it could render most efficient service in preventing foreigners slaughtering fur-seals in the water on their way to the islands. Mr. Boutwell's letter conveyed his opinion that a Revenue cutter could not protect the seals in the narrow pass referred to, since they went in pairs or singly and not in droves, and covered "a large region of water in their homeward travel to these islands," and he added : " I do not see that the United States would have the jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for that purpose unless they made such attempt within a marine league of the shore." It is impossible, in the light of the present contention of the United States, to suppose that Mr. Boutwell did not know that the slaughter of the seals in the waters ot the Behring's Sea was the fear of the collector and that the suggestion of the latter was to prevent foreign vessels pursuing seals through the pass in question.^ Notwithstanding this explanation, it is to be observed that no vessel of any kind was ever seized by the American Government for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes before mentioned, until 1884, when outside of the 3-mile limit in Behring's Sea. The list of seizures produced before the Committee is hereto appended.§ * November 3, 1837. i Report (.f Committee on Marine and Fisheries, p. 12, 50 Congress?1, Session 2, No. 3883, Appendix (F). X Appendix (G). § Appendix (C). ^-■°^t*t^,|c^^Tr^srrf""^^«'''i'p^m!jErp3" 269 The Minister of Marine and Fisheries feels assured that arguments such as he has referred to cannot do more than aggravate the situation and expose the weakness of a claim of jurisdiction which for nearly three years the Government of the United States have been permitted to maintain against the interests and rights of British subjects. It is to be regretted that some of the leading Representatives in the Canadian Parliament have already been induced to express the opinion that the British Government would not actively protect the rights of British subjects resident in Canada in cases wherein the United States were concerned, and while he, the Minister, believes such opinion to be entirely erroneous and unfounded, he desires to express the hope that these extreme views may be in nowise strengthened by any unnecessary delay in vigorously and effectively pressing the Canadian claims against the American Government for the illegal and unjustifiable action now under consideration. The record of the claims having been completed on the 12th day of January, 1888, and then forwarded to the Imperial authorities, the Minister recommends that Her Majesty's Government be urged to take such further steps as will promptly secure from the Government of the United States not only full and ample reparation for the loss and • damage sustained, but also a complete and immediate retraction of the claim of that country to exercise exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of the Behring's Sea The Committee concur in the foregoing resum6 and recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, and they advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute, together with the inclosures, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Committee further advise that the High Commissioner for Canada be directed to place himself in personal communication with the Secretary of State, so as to afford him any further information that may be desired, all which is respectfully submitted for vour Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Appendices, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, E. B. 12432.—(Report No. 3883.) In the House of Repkesentatives. January 29, 1889.—Read twice, recommitted to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, and ordered to be printed. Mr. Dunn, from the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, reported the following Bill:— A Bill to Amend Section 1963 of the Bevised Statutes, and to provide for the better Protection of the Fur Seals and Salmon Fisheries of Alaska, and for other Purposes. BE it enacted, by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, that section 1963 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be amended so as to read as follows:— " Section 1963. Within one year prior to the time when the lease heretofore made by the Secretary of the Treasury to ' the Alaska Commercial Company' of the right to engage in taking fur-seals on the islands of Saint Paul and St. George, pursuant to the Act of the 1st July, 1870, chapter 189, or when any future similar lease expires or is surrendered, forfeited, or terminated, the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease to proper and responsible parties for the best advantage of the United States, having due regard to the interest? of the Government, the native inhabitants, their comfort, maintenance, and education, as well a« to the interests of the parties heretofore engaged in the trade and the protection of the fisheries, the right of taking fur-seals on the islands herein named, and of sending a vessel or vessels to the islands for the skins of such seals, for the term of twenty years, at an annual rental of not less than 50,000 dollars, to be reserved in such lease and secured .by a deposit of United States' bonds to that amount; and the additional sum of not less than 3 dols. 50 c. for each fur-seal skin taken and shipped from the islands of St. Paul and St. George during the continuance of any lease to be paid into the Treasury of the United States, and every such lease shall be "duly executed in duplicate and shall not be transferable; and the Secretary of the Treasury is empowered to make all needful Regulations for the collection and payment of the same, and to secure the comfort, maintenance, education, and protection of the natives of those islands, and also to carry into full effect all the provisions of this chapter, 270 except as otherwise prescribed. And he shall give at least sixty days' notice of the letting of said lease by publication in at least one daily paper published in the cities of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, Chicago, New Orleans, St. Louis, and San Francisco, inviting bids for the same." Sec. 2. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States was intended to include and apply, and is hereby declared to include and apply, to all the waters of Behring's Sea in Alaska embraced within the boundary-lines mentioned and described in the Treaty with Russia, dated the 30th March, a.d. 1867, by which the Territory of Alaska was ceded to the United States ; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said Territory and waters for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize said waters and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the laws of the United States therein. Sec. 3. That section 1969 of the Revised Statutes of the United States be, and the same is hereby, repealed. Sec. 4. That the erection of dams, barricades, or other obstructions in any of the rivers of Alaska, with the purpose or result of preventing or impeding the ascent of salmon, or other anadromous species, to their spawning-grounds, is hereby declared to be unlawful, and the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to establish such Regulations and surveillance as may be necessary to insure that this prohibition is strictly enforced; and every person who shall be found guilty of a violation of the provisions of this section shall be fined not less than 250 dollars for each day of the continuance of such obstruction. Sec. 5. The Commissioner of Fish and Fisheries is hereby empowered and directed to institute an investigation into the habits, abundance, and distribution of the salmon of Alaska, as well as the present conditions and methods of the fisheries, with a view of recommending to Congress such additional legislation as may be necessary to prevent the impairment or exhaustion of these valuable fisheries, and placing them under regular and permanent conditions of production. Appendix (A). Extract from, the " Congressional Record," 1889, p. 2788. Fue-Seal and Salmon Fisheries. MR. DRUM from the Committee on the Merchant Marine and Fisheries, reported back with the amendments ordered by the House the Bill (H. R. 12432) to amend section 1963 of the Revised Statutes, and to provide for the better protection of the fur-seal and salmon fisheries of Alaska and for other purposes, which was laid on the table for the present, and the Bill and amendments and the accompanying Report ordered to be printed. Appendix (B). Notice. SECTION 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States provides that no person shall, without the consent of the Secretary of the Treasury, kill any otter, mink, marten, sable or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska territory, or in the waters thereof; and that any person convicted of a violation of that section shall, for each offence, be fined not less than 200 dollars or more than 1,000 dollars, or be imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and that all vessels, with their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of that section, shall be forfeited. No fur-bearing animal will therefore be allowed to be killed by persons other than natives within the limits of the Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, except fur-seals taken by the Alaska Commercial Company, in pursuance, of their lease. The use of fire-arms by the natives in killing otter during the months of May, June, July, August, and September, is hereby prohibited. No vessel will be allowed to anchor in the well-known otter-killing grounds, except those which may carry parties of natives to or from such killing grounds; and it will be the duty of the officers of the United States who may be in that locality to take all proper measures to enforce all the pains and penalties of the law against persons found guilty of a violation thereof. White men lawfully married to natives, and residing within the territory, are considered natives within the meaning of this Order. 271 Appendix (G). Fur-Seal Fisheries of Alaska. Exhibit C. List of Vessels seized under orders of the Treasury Department Date. Vessel Seized. ' Seizing Vessel- Commander. For violation of Section 1956, R. S.— Sept. 1, 1884 Hamburgh schooner " Adele " Revenue steamer "Corwin" .. Captain M. A. Healy. July 17, 1886 American schooner " San Diego " .. Ditto Captain C. A. Abbey. Aug. 1, „ British schooner " Thornton " Ditto Ditto. „ „ "Carolena" Ditto Ditto. Aug. 2, „ „ „ "Onward" .. Ditto Ditto. July 2, 1887 „ „ "Anna Beck" Revenue steamer " Rush " .. Captain 1.. G. Shepard. „ 9, „ „ "Wm. P. Sayward".. Ditto Ditto. „ 12, „ ,, „ "Dolphin" .. Ditto Ditto., » 16, „ A merican schooner " Lilly L." Ditto Ditto. ,. 17, 5i British schooner "Grace" .. Ditto Ditto. Aug. 6, „ American schooner " Ellen ".. Ditto Ditto. „ 6, „ „ „ "Annie" .. Ditto Ditto. ,, 6, „ British schooner " Alfred Adams " Ditto Ditto. „ 8, „ American schooner "Alpha" .. Ditto Ditto. >> 8, „ „ „ "Kate and Anna" . Ditto Ditto. „ 18, „ „ „ "San Jose" «• Ditto Ditio. „ 25, „ „ ,, "Allie I. Algar" .. .Revenue steamer "Bear" .. Captain W. A. Healy. „ 25, „ British schooner " Ada" .. .. Ditto Ditto. Sept. 2, „ American schooner "Sylvia Handy " .. For violation of Section 1961 R. S.— Ditto .. .. , Ditto. June 30, 1887 American schooner " Challenge " Revenue steamer " Rush " • • Captain L. G. Shepard. Appendix (D). Extract from the Report of tlie Governor of Alaska for the fiscal year 1888, to the Secretary of the Interior at Washington. BUT whatever may be the conclusion as to the advisability or propriety of continuing the present policy of leasing the rookeries, the question need give Congress little concern if the claim of our Government to exclusive jurisdiction to all that part of Behring's Sea ceded to it by Russia be not insisted upon and maintained. It is just as essential, even more so, that the seals should be protected during their annual migrations to and from the islands, as that they should have such protection while on the rookeries and breeding-grounds. Protection within the 3-mile limit will not suffice to prevent the depopulation of the rookeries and ultimate total extinction of seal life in the waters of Behring's Sea. In view of the fact that no seizures have been made the present year, the impression has gone abroad that hereafter there will be no interference by our Government with vessels which may engage in taking seals outside the 3-mile limit, and in consequence there is a well-grounded apprehension that next summer Behring's Sea will swarm with sealing-vessels from British Columbia and our own ports, and unless measures are taken to stop them at the threshold, incalculable damage is likely to be done to the rookeries. The views I entertain concerning what I believe to be the bad policy of leasing the islands, do not blind me to the fact that here is a most valuable interest which it is the duty of the Government to protect by every legal means in its power; it matters not whether the present system be continued, or whether some other and less objectionable plan of dealing with it be adopted. In view of the existing impression and the probability of a much more determined and destructive raid being made against the seals next summer than was ever before attempted, it is very desirable that the policy and determination ot the Government in the matter of their protection should be speedily and finally announced. Appendix (E). President Harrison's Proclamation against unlawful Hunting on Alaska. By the President of the United States of America: A Proclamation. THE following provisions of the laws of the United States are hereby published for the information of all concerned:— Section 1956 Revised Statutes, chapter 3, title 2, enacts that: " No person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal, within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof; and every person guilty thereof shall for each offence be fined not less than 200 nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both; and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited; but the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable, or other fur-bearing animal, except fur-seals, under such Regulations as he may prescribe; and it shall be the duty of the Secretary to prevent the killing of any fur-seal, and to provide for the execution of the provisions of this section until it is otherwise provided by law, nor shall he grant any special privileges under tins section." 2?2 Section 3 of the Act entitled "An Act to provide for the Protection of the Salmon Fisheries of Alaska," approved 2nd March, 1889, provides that: " Section 3. That section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominions of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea; and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation and cause the same to be published for one month at least in one newspaper (if any such there be) published at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering the waters for the purpose of Aaolating the provisions of said section; and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize the said waters and arrest all persons and seize all vessels found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the laws of the United States therein." Now, therefore, I, Benjamin Harrison, President of the United States, pursuant to the above- recited Statutes, hereby warn all persons against entering the waters of Behring's Sea within the dominion of the United States for the purpose of violating the provisions of said section 1956 Revised Statutes; and I hereby proclaim that all persons found to be, or to have been, engaged in any violation of the laws of the United States in said waters will be arrested and punished as above provided, and that all vessels so employed, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargoes, willbe seized and forfeited. In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed. Done at the City of Washington, this 21st day of March, 1889, and of the Independence of the United States the 113th. By the President, (Signed) BENJAMIN HARRISON. (Signed) James G. Blaine. Secretary of State. Appendix (F). Extract from Beport of Committee on. Marine and Fisheries, p. 12. IT having been claimed by the Canadian authorities in their brief relating to the seizure of Canadian vessels in Behring's Sea by our Revenue cutters, that ex-Secretary Boutwell had decided that the United States had no jurisdiction over Behring's Sea outside of the 3-mile limit, the attention of Mr. Boutwell was called to the matter by Honourable W. W. Eaton, late Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee, United States' Senate, to which Mr. Boutwell made the following reply:— " Sir, " Washington, January 18,1888. " Since the receipt of your letter of the 16th instant, I have examined with care the letter addressed to me as Secretary of the Treasury by T. G. Phelps, Esq., then Collector of Customs at the Port of San Francisco, dated the 25th March, 1872, and also my official reply thereto, dated the 19th April, 1872, in relation to the purpose of certain parties to capture fur-seals on their annual migration to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, through the Onimak Pass, and through the neighbouring approaches to the islands. Upon the examination of the correspondence, my recollection is in a degree refreshed, and my knowledge of the circumstances revived. , " The fourth sentence of Mr. Phelps' letter appears to proceed upon the idea that it was the purpose of the hunters, as their purpose was then understood by him, to take the seals upon the Pacific Ocean side of the Aleutian range of islands, and near the passes mentioned, and through which the animals were destined to move, and such was the view taken by me on which my reply was based. " Nor can I now see that there is ground for any other reasonable construction of the correspondence. " Mr. Phelps appears to have apprehended a diversion of seals from the Onimak Pass and the narrow straits near that pass, and his suggestion of a remedy was limited to the same field. Therefore, neither upon my recollection of facts as they were understood by me in 1872, nor upon the present reading of the correspondence, do I admit the claim of Great Britain that my letter is an admission of any right adverse to the claims of the United States in the waters known as Behring's Sea. My letter had reference solely to the waters of the Pacific Ocean, south of the Aleutian Islands. " Very respectfully, " Hon. W. W. Eaton, Washington, D.C." (Signed) " George S. Boutwell, Appendix (G). Eodracl from "Papers relating to Behring's Sea FisJieries," Washington Government Printing Office, 1887 Part V. THE'following correspondence shows the position assumed in 1872 by the Treasury Department in relation to the extent of jurisdiction of the United States in Alaskan waters:— " Mr. Phelps to Mr. Boutwell. " Customs House, San Francisco, Collector's Office, " Sir, " March 25, 1872. "I deem it proper to call the attention of the Department to certain rumours which appear to be well authenticated, the substance of which appears in the printed slip taken from the ' Daily Chronicle' of this date, herewith inclosed. 273 " In addition to the several schemes mentioned in this paper, information has come to this Office of another which is being organized at the Hawaiian Islands for the same purpose. It is well known that, during the month of May and the early part of June in each year, the fur-seal, in their migration from the southward to St. Paul and St. George Islands, uniformly move through Onimak Pass in large numbers, and also through the narrow straits near that pass which separate several small islands from Aleutian group. " The object of these several expeditions is unquestionably to intercept' the fur-seals at these narrow passages during the period above mentioned, and there, by means of small boats manned by skilful Indians or Aleutian hunters, make indiscriminate slaughter of those animals in the water, after the manner of hunting sea-otters. " The evil to be apprehended from such proceedings is not so much in respect of the loss resulting from the destruction of the seals at those places (although the killing of each female is in effect the destruction of two seals), but the danger lies in diverting these animals from their accustomed course to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, their only haunts in the United States. " It is believed by those who have made the peculiar'nature and habits of these animals a study that if they are by any means seriously diverted from the Une upon which they have been accustomed to move northward in their passage to these islands, there is great clanger of their seeking other haunts, and should this occur the natural selection would be Komandorsky Islands, which lie just opposite the Pribolov group, near the coast of Kamschatka, owned by Russia, and are now the haunts of fur-seals. " That the successful prosecution of the above-mentioned schemes would have the effect to drive ■ the seals from their accustomed course there can be no doubt. Considering, therefore, alone the danger which is here threatened to the interest of the Government in the seal fisheries, and the large annual revenue derived from the same, I have the honour to suggest, for the consideration of the Honourable Secretary of the Treasury the question whether the Act of. the 1st July, 1870, relating to those fisheries, does not authorize his interference by means of Revenue cutters to prevent foreigners and others from doing such an irreparable mischief to this valuable interest. Should the Honourable Secretary deem it expedient to send a cutter into these waters, I would respectfully, suggest that a steam-cutter would be able to render the most efficient service, and that it should be in the region ot Onimak Pass and St. Paul and St. George Islands by the 15th of next May. "I am, very respectfully, (Signed) " T. G. Phelps, Collector." Extract from San Francisco " Daily Chronicle," March 21 3872. " It is stated in reliable commercial circles that parties in Australia are preparing to fit out an expedition for the capture of fur-seals in Behring's Sea. The present, high prices of fur-seal furs in London and the European markets has acted powerfully in stimulating enterprises of a like character. But a few days ago we mentioned that a Victorian Company was organized for catching fur-seals in the North Pacific. Another party—an agent representing some Eastern capitalists—has been in this city for the past week making inquiries as to the feasibility of organizing an expedition for like purposes." " Mr. Boutwell to Mr. Phelps. " Sir, " Treasury Department, Washington, D. C, April 19,1872. " Your letter of the 25th ultimo was duly received, calling the attention of the Department to certain rumours circulating in San Francisco to the effect that expeditions are to start from Australia and the Hawaiian Islands to take fur-seals on their annual migration to the Islands of St. Paul and St. George through the narrow pass of Onimak. You recommend—to cut off the possibility of evil resulting to the interests of the United States from these expeditions—that a Revenue cutter be sent to the region of Onimak Pass by the 15th May next. . IA very full conversation was had with Captain Bryant upon this subject while he was at the Department, and he conceived it to be entirely impracticable to make such an expedition a paying one, inasmuch as the seals go singly or in pairs, and not in droves, and cover a large region of water in their homeward travel to these islands, and he did not seem to fear that the seals would be driven from their accustomed resorts, even were such attempts made. I In addition, I do not see that the United States would have the jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for that purpose, unless they made such attempt within a marine league of the shore. " As at present advised, I do not think it expedient to carry out your suggestions, but I will thank you to communicate to the Department any further facts or information you may be able to gather upon the subject. " I am, very respectfully, (Signed) " Grorge S. Boutwell, Secretary." No. 202. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.— (Received August 3.) Sir, Downing Street, August 3, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, au extract of a letter from the High Commissioner for Canada respecting the alleged seizure of the % Black Diamond " in Behring's Sea. [128] 2 N JU1I1J U.1111IJJ11JI 274 Lord Knutsford feels assured that the subject will receive the careful and early consideration of Lord Salisbury. I am, &c. . (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure in No. 202. The High Commissioner for Canada to Lord Knutsford. (Extract.) 9, Victoria Chambers, Westminster, August 2, 1889. . REFERRING to the interview with which I was favoured by Lord Salisbury, yourself, and Sir Julian Pauncefote yesterday, I beg to inclose cuttings from the London " New York Herald,"* and " Daily News "t of to-day, which seem to leave no doubt that the seizure of the British schooner the " Black Diamond | took place in the open waters of Behring's Sea, and is therefore in direct violation of the engagement made by the United States that no more seizures of British vessels should take place pending a settlement of the present controversy. No. 203. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, August 5, 1889. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 3rd instant, with its inclosures, addressed to Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies by the High Commissioner for Canada, calling attention to the reported seizure in Behring's Sea of the British schooner " Black Diamond" by the United States5 Revenue-cutter 1 Rush." It appears from the newspaper cuttings forwarded by Sir C. Tupper, that despatches from British Colombia, giving details of the case, have arrived at Ottawa, and Lord Salisbury thinks that it would be desirable to obtain by cable some official statement of the case from the Canadian Government before telegraphing to Her Majesty's Representative at Washington. I am to point out that everything seems to depend in this case on the precise position of the "Black Diamond" at the time of seizure. Lord Salisbury would also be glad to be furnished with the details of the case of the "Triumph," to which allusion is made in the newspapers, but of which no information has reached the Foreign Office. The original inclosures accompanying your letter are returned herewith. I am, &c. (Signed) T. V. LISTER. No. 204. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 9.) Sir, Downing Street, August 8, 1889. WITH reference to your letter of the 5th instant respecting the seizure of the | Black Diamond " in the Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram which was addressed to the Governor-General of Canada on the receipt of your letter, together with a copy of one received this day from Lord Stanley of Preston in reply. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 204. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, August 6, 1889. SEIZURE of I Black Diamond " and " Triumph." Telegraph at once full information, specifying precise point where seized, and all the facts connected with these cases. August 2 ■f August 2, and " Standard " of same dale. Not printed 275 Inclosure 2 in No. 204. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) CASES of " Black Diamond " and " Triumph." Newspaper reports appear substantially correct. According to private telegram from Victoria, seizure of " Black Diamond " 70 miles from land. I have not yet received from Ottawa official Report asked for by telegram. August 7, 1889. No. 205. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 9.) Sir, Downing Street, August 9,1889. WITH reference to your letter of the 18th April last, requesting to be supplied with information as to the extent to which vessels belonging to British Columbia were engaged in seal-hunting in Behring's Sea prior to 1886, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, with its inclosures, upon the subject. Lord Salisbury will observe that the last sub-inclosure to this despatch tends to show that the shooting of seals in tbe open sea is not the wanton and wasteful destruction of seal life which it is alleged to be by the authorities of the United States. I am to request that the inclosures to the Governor-General's despatch, which are forwarded in original, may be returned to this Department when they have been printed at the Foreign Office. I am, &c. (Signed) EDWARD WINGFIELD. Inclosure 1 in No. 205. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, New Richmond, P.Q., July 20, 1889. WITH reference to your Lordship's despatch of the 27th April last, transmitting a copy of a letter from the Foreign Office requesting to be supplied with information as to the extent to which vessels belonging to British Columbia were engaged in seal-hunting in Behring's Sea prior to 1886, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council concurring in a Report of my Minister of Marine and Fisheries on the subject. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 205. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, June 29, 1889. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a despatch dated the 27th April, 1889, from the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, requesting information as to the extent to which vessels belonging to British Columbia were engaged in seal-hunting in Behring's Sea prior to 1886. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries to whom the despatch was referred states that until the return of the sealing fleet, which some time since cleared from British Columbia upon its annual sealing voyage, he is unable to furnish complete information upon the early history of the seal industry in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, so far as it relates to'vessels belonging to British Columbia. The Minister desires, however, to call attention to the Customs records at Victoria, British Columbia, from which it appears that the schooner | Kate," 58 tons, Dutch Harry, master, H. Ogilvie, navigator, went to Behring's Sea in 1865 and again in 1866 upon a sealing voyage. The Minister observes that it is to be remembered that the sealing industry was carried on by British Columbian vessels, in the waters of British Columbia on the north and north-western coast, as well as in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, the [128] 2 N 2 276 seals at certain times of the year spreading ^ver these waters and being captured in great numbers at different points. In 1880 the fur-seal trade of the British Columbia Coast was of great importance. Previously, and even then, it was difficult to obtain absolutely correct Returns regarding it, but it was estimated that 20,000 skins were obtained in the immediate neighbourhood of Vancouver Island alone during that season. There were engaged in this fishery in that year the following British Columbia vessels, sailors, and hunters :— ' Vessels. Tonnage. Sailors. Hunters. Favorite 79 5 40 Onward .. 35 4 30 Thornton 35 4 24 Anna Beck .. 50 5 32 "Wanderer .. .. 16 3 16 Alert . b 30 3 32 Winifred Smploying 93 canoes. 15 O O 12 : 260 27 186 It will be observed that of these vessels a number were, in 1886 and 1887, seized by the United States' Government in Behring's Sea, and form the subject of the claims now being pressed. In the season of 1881 between 13,000 and 14,000 skins, worth from 150,000 dollars .to 180,000 dollars, were obtained by the following British vessels :— Vessels. Tonnage. Sailors. Hunters. Anna Beck .. .. .. .. 50 6 32 Thornton .. .. .. 35 5 24 Triumph .. .. .. .. 18 3 12 Winifred .. .. 15 3 12 Onward 35 4 32 Black Diamond .. .. 80 5 36 Juanita .. .. 80 5 36 Favorite .. .. 80 5 36 Mary Ellen 65 5 44 Kate 55 5 24 483 46 292 Employing 146 canoes. In the next season the catch was valued at 177,000 dollars and the following vessels were engaged in this pursuit:— Vessels. Tonnage. Sailors. Hunters. Grace Dolphin .. .. .. .. Juanita .. .. .. .. W. P. Sayward Favorite .. .. .. ., Mary Ellen .. . .. .. Kate Onward .. .. Black Diamond .. .. .. Winifred .. .. Anna Beck .. .. .. ., Thornton .. Alfred Adams 80 80 50 75 80 65 55 35 80 15 50 35 75 5 5 4 4 5 5 4 4 4 2 4 4 4 36 36 32 32 32 36 28 32 32 12 32 28 32 Employing 200 canoes. 775 54 400 !™gCT',',CT^rW™'-"J"! J1-V*k 27) And in 1883 the following vessels from British-Columbia pursued this industiv :— Vessels. Tonuage. Sailors. Hunters. W. P. Sayward .. 1 75 4 32 Favorite .. 80 5 32 Mary Ellen 65 5 36 Kate .. .. .. .. I 55 4 28 Onward .. .. 35 4 S2 Black Diamond 80 4 32 Winifred .. .. 15 2 12 Thornton .. .. 35 4 28 Alfred Adams .. ' 75 4 32 Anna Beck •• 50 4 32 565 40 296 Employing 148 canoes. Apparently and in the absence of more definite information at this moment available in the continual pursuit of these seals, it was after this that fur-seals were systematically sought in the Behring's Sea, as well as in the North Pacific Ocean by British sealers, for it is fonnd that in 1884 Daniel and Alexander McLean, both British subjects, took the American schooner " San Diego " to Behring's Sea, and that they were successful in the seal fishery. On their return they purchased the British schooner " Mary Ellen," 63 tons, and chartered the schooner " Favorite," 80 tons, and with white crew, white hunters, and Indians cleared from Victoria for Behring's Sea in 1885, where they met with repeated success, returning to Victoria before 1886 and clearing in 1886 again for the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. The Minister further observes that attention is drawn in the letter from the Foreign Office, now under consideration, to the statement of Mr. Bayard in a letter addressed to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington on the 12th April, 1887, in which the following passage occurs:— "The Laws of the United States regulating the killing of fur-seals have been in force for upwards of seventeen years, and, prior to the seizure of last summer, but a single infraction is known to have occurred and that was promptly punished." In this connection it is important to note that the Governor of Alaska in his Report, bearing date the 1st October, 1886, and again in 1887, regarded the capture of one American and three British schooners apparently as the first overt act on the part of the United States' Government to assert the claim for exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of Behring's Sea north of the Aleutian Islands. Extracts from these two Reports, hereto appended, indicate as well that, in the opinion of the Governor, an indiscriminate slaughter of seals had been previously carried on in these waters.. In the voluminous correspondence touching the acquisition and Government of Alaska by the United States published in the Executive documents of Congress from 1868 down to the time of the seizures in question, the Minister, after a careful examination^ has been unable to find, in the various instructions given from time to time to Commanders of the Revenue Service, or of ships of war of the United States cruizing in Behring's Sea, organizing a Government in Alaska and guarding the interests of the Alaska Comn ercial Company upon the islands leased to the Company, any suggestion of the intention of that Government to assert a claim which it had so vehemently disputed when advanced by Russia. The Minister, on the contrary, has observed that while vessels from British Columbia and elsewhere were trading and fishing generally in the Behring's Se:i, the instructions relating to the fisheries given to Revenue marine ships by the United States' Government until 1886 were confined to the protection of the Seal Islands from marauders who were in the habit of landing thereon. It is to be noted that the seizures of British sealers in the open sea followed the Report on the cruize of the Revenue marine steamer " Corwin " in the year 1885. In this Report it is among other things stated that a special look-out was kept for vessels sealing when shaping a course for St. Paul's. The Captain in his Report says: " While we were in the vicinity of the Seal Islands a look-out was kept at the mast-head LM1IUHMLBW 278 for vessels cruizing, sealing, or illicitly trading among those islands." Having drawn attention to the number of vessels which sought the seals on the islands, and having illustrated the great difficulty of preventing the so-called "'piracy | thereupon, the Commander concludes as follows :— " In view of the foregoing facts, I would respectfully suggest— "(1.) That the Department cause to be printed in the Western Papers, particularly those of San Francisco, California, and Victoria, British Columbia, the sections of the Law relating to the killing of fur-bearing animals in Alaskan waters, and defining in specific terms what is meant by Alaskan waters. I (2.) That a Revenue-cutter be sent to cruize in the vicinity of Pribyloff Islands and Aleutian group during the sealing season." While the first suggestion has never been adopted, no notice nor Act having yet defined what is meant by Alaskan waters, it seems to be clear that, in accordance with this Report and other similar representations, the United States' Government sent Revenue- cutters in 1886 with instructions for the first time to take sealing-vessels found anywhere in the great ocean called the Behring's Sea. Accordingly Mr. George R. Tingle, Special Agent of the Treasury Department, reports from St. Paul Island, Alaska, 31st July, 1886, to the Honourable C. S. Fairchild, Acting Secretary of Treasury, Washington, District of Columbia, that the Revenue-cutters were then engaged in keeping marauders from landing on the Seal Islands, and that the Captain of the Revenue-cutter " Corwin," on the 26th July had reported having seized the schooner " San Diego," which vessel he calls an " old offender." He goes on to say: I This commencement of captures will do much towards breaking up the marauding business about the islands this season; indeed, the ' Corwin's' presence here has undoubtedly kept off quite a fleet of schooners and destroyed their unlawful business hereabouts. With the cutter ' Bear' to remain until fall, after coming out of the Arctic, seal life will be protected from pirates this season. It is the only means by which good can be accomplished in that direction. I do earnestly hope the Department will see the necessity of keeping a cutter around the fur-seal islands every season from the 1st July to the 1st November." From the extract in Mr. Bayard's letter it appears that he was under the impression that prior to the seizures of 1886 but a single infraction of the United States' Law regulating fur-seals as construed by the Commanders of the Revenue-vessels which made these seizures, had occurred. The particulars already referred to by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries fully meet Mr. Bayard's assertion, whether he refers to the violation of the Statute inside of the 3-mile limit or upon the waters of the sea at large. Attention may be directed to the Report of Mr. George Davidson, Assistant United States' Survey on board the United States' Revenue-steamer " Lincoln," to Professor Benjamin Pierce, Superintendent United States' Coast Survey, Washington, District of Columbia,in 1867, wherein he says, when touching upon the fisheries of the Behring's Sea: 1 Two or three small schooners sailed from Victoria and made small catches." And again, "In addition to the already acknowledged success of the cod fisheries from Sail Francisco and Victoria and our own experience, I add that of Captain Bryant, formerly a whaler in the North Pacific, and now an influential member of the Massachusetts Legislature, quoting from your notes of the 26th May. Behring's Sea is a mighty reservoir of cod and halibut, so that he never threw over his liues without bringing up fish in whatever part of the sea he might happen." It is admitted that Mr. Davidson is not dealing with the fur-seal fisheries to which Mr. Bayard specifically refers, yet the extracts from this Report appear to the Minister to be important, touching the general question of mare clausum, bearing testimony as they do to the undisputed enjoyment of the fisheries in general in the Behring's Sea by vessels from British Columbia long ago. The Minister desires to avail himself of this opportunity to direct attention to recent criticisms of one of the most influential and independent organs of public opinion in the United States upon the position taken by the Government of that country as regards Behring's Sea. The Minister appends herewith a paper upon the " Fur-seal Fisheries of the Pacific Coast and Alaska," recently prepared and published in San Francisco, and designed to explain, more particularly to Eastern United States' Senators and Congressmen, the value of the-fur-seal fisheries, which contains much valuable information not adverse to the contention of the Canadian Government. The Committee, concurring in the foregoing Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, recommend that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute to *"—rirnnwiriri 27a. the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, for the information of the Foreign Office, and that a copy thereof be sent to the High Commissioner. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Appendix No. 1. Extract from the Report of the Governor of Alaska for the Fiscal Year 1886. Protection of Fur-Seal and Sea Otter, page 48. AS these seizures have most probably raised an international question involving the right of the United States to exclusive jurisdiction over the waters of the Behring's Sea north of the Aleutian Islands, and east of the 193rd meridian, west longitude, it may not be unbecoming in me to suggest that unless that right is insisted upon and maintained, an industry which now yields a revenue equal to a fair rate of interest on the amount paid for the whole of Alaska will not only be destroyed, but the means of livelihood will likewise be taken away from a large number of people whom the Government is bound by every consideration of honour and public policy to protect. I can conceive of no other plan by which the seal fisheries can be preserved than the one long ago adopted and now in vogue, whether they ought not now to be yielding a very large revenue to the Government is a question to be discussed a year or two hence. It is reasonably certain, however, that unless our Government asserts and maintains the jurisdiction ceded to it by Eussia, the Seal Islands will in a very few years be robbed of all present or prospective value to any one.' It is just as essential to the preservation of this industry that the seals be protected against indiscriminate slaughter while on their way to and from their breeding places, as that the number to be taken on the islands should be limited, and every necessary restriction imposed as to age, sex, and the mode of killing. * # ' * * * * Unless our right to such jurisdiction be waived or abandoned, seals once in Behring's Sea are as much the property of the United States as the islands themselves, and should be no less zealously guarded than are the Newfoundland cod banks by the Dominion of Canada. Unless so guarded chartered rights will not only be impaired, but a source of large and perpetual revenue to the Government utterly destroyed. Appendix No. 2. Extract from the Beport of the Governor of Alaska for the Fiscal Year 1887. Protection of Fw-Seal. IN connection with these seizures, from which it seems to me no other inference can be drawn than that our Government is determined to assert and maintain the right of exclusive jurisdiction over all that portion of Behring's Sea ceded to it by Eussia, I can only reiterate that part of my last Annual Report in which I essayed, rather feebly I fear, not only to show the necessity of such a policy to the preservation of the sea-fur industry, but the wrong its abandonment would inflict upon the very considerable number of native people who wholly or in large part depend upon it for a livelihood, and whom, it appears to me, it is the duty of the Government to protect. In view of the fact that the seizure of these vessels and their forfeiture has raised an international question of grave importance, I have thought it proper to include with this Eeport a copy of the brief submitted by the Queen's Counsel in the case of the British schooners, together with the argument of the United States' Attorney and the opinion of the Court. Honourable A. K. Delan'ey, Collector of Customs, having been designated as special Counsel on account of the illness and subsequent death of Colonel M. D. Ball, United States' District Attorney, represented the Government, and made what I think will be generally conceded a most able and forcible, if not wholly unanswerable, argument. (See Appendix C.) Appendix No. 3. Report of the Cruize of the Revenue Marine Steamer " Corwin " in the Year 1885. (Ex. Doc. No. 153, 49th Congress, 1st Session, pp. 17 and 18.) DURING the year quite a number of vessels have raided Alaskan waters for seals and other fur- bearing animals. Among the number the following, with their catches, are noted:— " Look-out," 1,100 seals; " Mary Ellen," 2,309 seals; " Favourite," 2,065 seals ; " San Diego," 1,725 seals; "Sierra," 1,312 seals; "Vanderbilt," about 1,000 seals; "Henrietta," about 1,200 seals; " Alexander," 660 seals and 107 sea-otters; " Otter," a few seals and about fifty or sixty sea-otters; with the " Adele " and other vessels yet to hear from. 280 " Thus it will be seen that upwards of ten vessels were engaged in unlawful sealing in Alaskan waters during the present year, and I am convinced that next year the number will be considerably increased. I Rumours are current here that the American Consul at Victoria has informed different people . that they are not prohibited by law from sealing in Alaskan or other waters, provided they keep more than 3 leagues from the shore. Encouraged by this decision and the success of the marauding sealers during the present year, parties in Victoria are fitting out vessels (two or three being steam-schooners) to engage in the business next year. Not only are seals killed out of season, but they are shot in the water, and young and old, male and female, killed indiscriminately, all in direct violation of Sections 1960 and 1961, Revised Statutes, and all tending, if allowed to continue, to drive the seals from their regular haunts." Appendix No. 4. Wardman's " Trip to Alaska," pp. 116 and 117. (Published at Boston and New York in 1884.) SEA OTTER ISLAND, lying about 5 miles southwardly from St. Paul's, is another landing-place for the fur-seal, but only to a limited extent. Owing to the fact that it is not permanently inhabited, some marauders were in the habit of landing on the opposite side, where they could not be seen from St. Paul's, and killing whatever seal they could find, without regard to sex, age, or condition. The Company reported these facts to the Secretary of the Treasury, who decided that the intention of the' Act under which the-lease was authorized appeared to be to give all the islands of the group to the lessees for the regulation of the traffic and preservation of the fur-seal. Then, as the Company could not defend Sea Otter Island, the Government was asked to do so, and now the practice is to leave a Revenue marine guard there during the sealing season. Appendix No. 5. Extract from House Executive Documents, 2nd Session, 4:8th Congress, 1884-85, vol. 29. Letter from the Secretary of tlu, Treasury relative to the Protection of Seal and Enforcement of Laws in Alaska, and recommending an appropriation of 25,000 dollars for the Revenue Marine Service in that Territory, February 24, 1885. (Ex. Doc. No. 252, 48th Congress, 2nd Session.) Revenue Marine Service.—In this connection I beg to call the attention of Congress to the importance of the work performed in Alaska by the Revenue cutters. The seal fisheries yield annually to the Government a revenue of about 300,000 dollars. The islands on which the seals are taken are protected from incursions of marauding vessels alone through the cruizing of the Revenue cutters. Appendix No. 6. Report of tlic Cruize of the Revenue Marine Steamer " Corwin" in the year 1885. (Ex. Doc. No. 153, 49th Congress, 1st Session, p. 15.) ON our arrival at Ounalaska on the 15th, the steamer "Dora" was in port, and three days later the schooner " Mattie Turner " arrived. The " Turner " reported having seen, three weeks previous, a schooner between the seal islands and Ounalaska, and thought she might still be cruizing in that vicinity for the purpose of killing seals. Appendix No. 7. "New York Herald," June 7, 1889. Mr. Blaine's " Embarrassments."—The " Tribune " admits that the " Herald " is right when it assumes that the State Department will be embarrassed by the action of the previous Administration in dealing with the Behring's Sea question. That is to say, Secretary Blaine, if he undertakes to negotiate with England on the theory that Behring's Sea between the Straits and the Aleutian Islands is a land-locked or closed sea, will be confronted with recent confessions by Mr. Bayard that it is an open sea, and that its fisheries are to be regulated by international action of the leading Maritime Powers. Very true. It is less than two years since Secretary Bayard invited a number of foreign Powers into some arrangement with the United States for the protection of the Behring's seal fisheries. That '•-h -vnyf^ft.^.-.^.™.™-.......™.. * ■'—•^.—"'.—**~~". 281 was a distinct admission on the part of this Government, and a specific announcement to the Powers addressed that the United States did not claim exclusive jurisdiction over the waters, nor assume any exclusive right to regulate the fisheries. And in keeping with this view was the action of the Government in ordering the release of the Canadian sealers seized by our cruizers. Of course all this will promptly and with reason be cited against Secretary Blaine if he now abandons' the position and undertakes to maintain the contrary. But this is not all that will be cited against the Secretary to his " embarrassment." He will be confronted by the fact that the United States more than sixty years ago emphatically denied the claim of Russia to exclusive jurisdiction, and never conceded that claim while Russia owned Alaska. He will be confronted by the fact that this Government asserted a similar principle in the case of the Black Sea and that of the Baltic. He will further be confronted by the geographical fact that Behring's Sea is an open sea, and by the universal principle of international law that an open sea cannot be owned or controlled by one nation without the consent of other nations. Lastly, Mr. Blaine wiil be " embarrassed" by the fact that he is the first Secretary of State to advance the claim that Behring's Sea is a closed sea, subject to the control of the United States. But, says our contemporary, President Harrison's recent Proclamation, which is based on the Act of Congress of the 2nd March, 1889, " embodies the claim to exclusive jurisdiction." Well, suppose it does. That cannot help Mr. Blaine much in his controversy with England. A claim asserted by Congress or the President, or both, has no more international force than a claim asserted by the State Department. But does the Act of Congress of the 2nd March, on which the President's Proclamation rests, assert the right of control over Behring's Sea ? It asserts the right of control over " all the dominion of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea." Now the extent of the dominion of the United States in those waters is the very point in issue. The previous Act passed in 1868, immediately after the purchase, applied to " the waters of Alaska." If the Amendatory Act of 1889 was intended to assert a larger domain than that of 1868, to declare in favour of exclusive jurisdiction, will not Mr. Blaine be also confronted with the argument that this claim was not asserted by Congress till this year? However, we hope that Mr. Blaine will be able to overcome his many " embarrassments " in the controversy, and to satisfy England and the other Powers interested that his claim is well grounded. Behring's Sea is a great body of water, and its fisheries are very valuable. If we can secure control of it with foreign consent, so much the better for us. But it looks as if Mr. Blaine had a big undertaking on his hands. ■ "New York Herald," May 29, 1889. The Behring's Sea Question.—So it seems Secretary Blaine has decided that Behring's Sea is a mare clausum, or closed sea, over which the United States has exclusive jurisdiction and absolute control. No one, native or alien, but the Alaska Company is to be allowed to catch seals in those waters, and any vessel, American or foreign, found violating this prohibition is to be seized. Can Mr. Blaine successfully maintain this claim in the diplomatic controversy which its announcement must provoke ? Can our Government undertake to enforce it without inviting a foreign war ? The claim is against universally recognized principles of international law. It is opposed to the traditions and precedents of our own Government. It is contrary to the record of the State Department on this very question as recently as-the administration of Mr. Bayard. In the law of nations no principle is more settled than that the high seas are the public property of the world, which cannot be monopolized by any one Power. As Woolsey says:— The high sea is free and open • to all nations. It cannot be the property or the empire of a particular State. It cannot become property, for it cannot be possessed. It is clearly for the common benefit of mankind. It is a common pathway, separating and yet binding, intended alike for all. It is equally well settled that a nation may own and exercise exclusive control over a " closed sea "—that is, a body of water either lying wholly within, or is almost entirely surrounded by, its own territory. The jurisdiction of every country over the ocean for a marine league, or 3 miles, from its coast is universally conceded. A glance at the Map will show that Behring's Sea is not a closed sea. It is a vast expanse of water more than 1,000 miles wide. It is not land-locked. It is part of the Pacific Ocean; it forms the water highway between that and the Arctic Ocean. To claim it is to claim the high seas. The State Department now bases its claim on the rights acquired from Russia when we purchased Alaska. There can be no question that the United States succeeded to all the rights held by Russia. But what were Russia's rights ? It is true that Russia claimed Behring's Sea long before we bought Alaska. But that country never had any exclusive right to it, for the simple reason that it never acquired, and never could' acquire, except by the consent of nations, any such right. This Government cannot simply fall back on Russia's claim. It will be required by foreign Powers to show that the claim is well founded, oi abandon it. Russia's claim was never conceded by any other Power. On the contrary, it was emphatically denied by the two foreign Powers most interested. It was denied by the United States, and it was denied by Great Britain. Russia yielded to this Government in a Treaty made in 1824, and to England in one made in the following year. Our Treaty continued in force for only ten years, but we never conceded to Russia the right it claimed. If the State Department now undertakes to maintain Russia's old claim it will be confronted not only by the opposition of England, but also by its own record. Moreover, it will run counter to the international principle it has invoked against foreign Powers in numerous cases, that an open sea cannot be exclusively controlled by any nation. [128] 2 O 282 Appendix No. 8. " Fur Seal Fisheries of the Pacific Coast and Alaska" THIS pamphlet, in connection with the Chart inclosed, is designed to explain more particularly to our Eastern Senators and Congressmen the full value of the fur-seal fisheries, in order that when the question of re-leasing the fur-seal islands of St. George and St. Paul arises, they may know exactly what they are doing, so that they may not grant a monopoly to any firm or Company for a trifle, which has been done in the past' to the Alaska Commercial Company of San Francisco. These islands are so far away from the eastern part of our country that the great majority, of merchants and business men know comparatively nothing about this great industry, and the profits connected with the same. ■ The writer, during the past two or three years, has met a great many eastern visitors to our coast, and whenever the question of the fur-seal fisheries has been brought up he finds that in all cases they have not the slightest idea of the same, and whenever the value is explained, and Charts shown, 'showing just how broad the claim our Government has taken in its jurisdiction of the Behring's Sea, in protection of the fur-seal, or more particularly protecting the Alaska Commercial Company in their vast monopoly of the fur-seal fisheries, and by this monopoly enabling this Company to control nearly all of the fur trade of Alaska, they are astonished, and still more when it is further explained to them that the 100,000 fur-seals, as taken by the Alaska Commercial Company, bring nearly 2,000,000 dollars each year, and for this privilege the fee to the United States' Government is the small sum of 296,286 dol. 82 c, being the exact average amount paid by the Alaska Commercial Company, and to be paid by them each year, as claimed by the Alaska Commercial Company, during the twenty years of their lease. This is taken from the Alaska Commercial Company's own statement in their reply to Governor Swineford's charges (see p. 12 of that volume)—and these figures cannot be disputed by them—thus enabling the Company to make a clear profit of not less than 1,000,000 to 1,250,000 dollars each year off the seal islands alone. When they come to figure that this has been going on for nearly twenty years, it is easy to explain how they have controlled all the trade of this vast section. Evidently a strong effort is behig made by certain parties that the leasing of the fur-seal islands shall be at the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury to say who is the proper person to lease these islands to, and that a set sum shall be the specified amount for this lease. Below we copy an article cut from one of the daily papers, entitled— The Seal Fisheries. (An interesting Report presented to the House.) Washington, January 29. Representative Dunn, from the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, to-day presented the results of the investigation by the Committee into the fur-seal fisheries of Alaska, with special reference to whether the Contract giving the Alaska Commercial Company the right to take fur-seals had been violated. Dunn accompanied his Report with a Bill on the subject. It proposes to amend the. present Law by providing that one year before the present lease to the Alaska Company expires, or when any future similar lease expires, the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease to the proper persons the right of taking fur-seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George for twenty years, at not less than 50,000 dollars per annum, and 3 dol. 50 c. in addition for each sealskin shipped from the islands. Such lease shall not be transferable. You will notice in this Report it is recommended that the Secretary of the Treasury shall lease to the proper persons. Now, the question is, who are the proper persons ? Can any one read this Report and fail to see where the interest is ? Why not put the leasing of these islands in a business shape like; any other Government Contract ? Let it be awarded to the highest bidder, give all a chance, and not allow this one man to decide who are the proper persons to whom these islands shall be leased." If it is done in this way it is safe to say that the next lease will realize from 600,000 to. 800,000 dollars per annum to our Government, instead of 400,000 dollars, as'per recommendation of Mr. Dunn. You will also notice that it is recommended to amend the Laws so that the Secretary of the Treasury shall not only have the power of re-leasing the islands, but that this Law shall apply to any future lease, thereby extending this power to an unlimited extent, in fact as long as these islands are; of any value for leasing. Who would not like to be the Secretary of the Treasury and have this power ? It would be almost as good as having the islands themselves. Now, we protest against such action. It shows fraud upon its face so plain that a blind man ought to see through it. This Report of the 29th January goes further on, and says:— The present Law is declared to apply to all the waters of Behring's Sea in Alaska mentioned in the Treaty with Russia by which Alaska was ceded to the United States, and the President shall take measures to have arrested all persons, and seized all vessels, violating the laws of the United States therein. In addition to the above provision is made for the protection of the salmon fisheries. The Report recommends that the Act to-prevent the-extermination of our fur-bearing animals in Alaska be Mll*iM»gVTTy*y*>f»^i«Tl.i|i«MiJ>» M^rara-nf m.mm^ """*"'" 288 continued in force with certain amendments, believing that not only the system it adopts but the methods of carrying it into effect are well adapted for the purpose indicated. In conclusion, the Committee finds the following facts ;— That if the Law protecting seal life is enforced, the preservation of the seal rookeries will be assured the revenue continued and increased, and the native inhabitants of the seal islands maintained, without cost to the Government; that the Alaska Commercial Company has fully performed its Contract with the Government, and has contributed liberallyto the support, maintenance, comfort, and civilization of the inhabitants of not only the seal islands, but to those of the Aleutian Islands, Kodiac, and the mainland; that the fur-seal industry will have paid into the Treasury over 8,000,000 dollars during the period of the present lease; that the chief object of the purchase of Alaska was the acquisition of the valuable products of Behring's Sea, that at the cession of Alaska to the United States the Russian title to Behring's Sea was perfect and undisputed, and that by virtue of the cession the United States acquired complete title' to all that portion of Behring's Sea situated within the limits prescribed by Treaty. In reviewing this part of the Report we are not prepared to say that the Company has not fulfilled all of its obligations to 'the Government, certainly it shoidd have done so with the profits connected with this monopoly. This part of the Report was, as we understand, the result of an investigation of the charges made by Governor Alfred P. Swineford, of Alaska, against the Alaska Commercial Company. We hereby republish Governor Swineford's reply, as-published in various papers previous to this date:— Governor Swineford's Report. The annual Report of Governor Swineford, of Alaska, on the territory and the operations of the Alaska Commercial Company was laid before both Houses of Congress on the 19th January. The Governor reaffirms and emphasizes the accusations heretofore made by him against the Company in its dealings with the natives other than those living on the seal islands. Concerning the treatment of these he has no word of complaint. He also says that the Company's Contract with the Government relative to the taking of fur-seal is, in his opinion, faithfully observed. The Company's treatment of the mainland natives he characterizes as unjust and cruel in the extreme. Referring to the denial of the charges against the Company in his last annual Report, he says:— " I now and here reiterate every one of those charges, though I know full well that an investigation made by a Committee of Congress, holding its sessions in Washington, and calling as witnesses only those who have been recipients of the Company's favours, is not likely to arrive at any just conclusion as to their truth or falsity. I can only say that each and every statement I have made concerning the operations of the Company is susceptible of the clearest and most convincing proof, but the evidence will not be found lying around loose in the cities of Washington and San Francisco. It must be sought for among the people who have suffered from its oppressions rather than in the persons of those who have had free transportation on its ships and been wined and dined at the* tables of its officers and agents. A Sub-Committee of Congress going over the route taken by me in the recent cruize of the ' Thetis,' assuring the people of protection against still greater oppression after its departure, will have no difficulty whatever in finding the evidence to prove the truth of every statement I have made." The Report'for 1887 above referred to was published in the "Fur Trade Review" for July 1887. The " Fur Trade Review" can be obtained by addressing the publishers.. No. 35, Bond Street, New York City. In referring to the part of this Report where it is claimed that the fur-seal industry will have paid into the Treasury over 8,000,000 dollars during the period of the present lease, we claim this part to be false. The Government has not, and will not, have received it at the end of the lease, and taking the Alaska Commercial Company's reply to Governor Swineford's charge in referring to what they have paid, the-Alaska Commercial Company says:— "As this part of the subject bears upon the Company's relation to the Government, we may be excused for here calling attention to the fact that the total annual tax and rental paid by this Company to the United States from the 1st July, 1S70, to August 1887, amounts to 5,290,736 dol. 49 c. " Calculating that the full number of fur-seals for the next two years be taken, we will have paid the full sum of 5,925,736 dol. 49 c." See pp. 11 and 12 of reply of the Alaska Commercial Company to the charge of Governor Alfred E. Swineford, of Alaska, against the Company, in his annual Report for the year 1887. Now, this is' copied 'directly from the Alaska Commercial Company's reply. Taking their own figures for the same, where they only claim they will have paid into the Treasury at the end of their lease 5,925,736' dol. 49 c, this leaves a difference of 2,074,263 dol. 51 c. between what they will actually have paid, according to their own figures, and what is claimed in the Report of Representative Dunn. Now, we ask, why this false representation by one of our Representatives ? Having now fully shown why this Report, as recommended, should have no bearing—showing the falsity of the same—we will now go further, and show the value of the. catch of the 100,000 fur-seals, as taken by the Alaska Commercial Company for the year 1888. We will also show nearly the actual cost of the expense to the Company in taking them, sending to market, commissions, &c. While this is a difficult matter to do exactly, we will come near it, and allow long margins in favour of this expense, enough so- that it will undoubtedly leave a balance in their favour [128] 2 O 2 nm UUUMMHWMfi 284: In the first place, we take their average amount paid to the Government, as per their own estimate and statement This must be correct. We then take the money paid to the natives for killing and skinning the seal. In their reply to Governor Swineford's charge (p. 19) they say:— "There are 87 families on St. Paul Island ;" there are 26 families on St. George Island; making 113 families in all." We will give the benefit of 450 dollars for each family, which is the highest price claimed as being paid to them for their service (see p. l(i in their reply to Governor Swineford's charge). This would give total expense for killing, skinning, curing, and loading into the vessel, as paid to the natives This allows the very highest estimate paid for this service, according to their own Report. We will now make an allowance of for expense of the Company on the islands for the year, independent of the sum paid to the natives. This is for white clerk hire, insurance, and for fuel, and an abundant supply of salted salmon, which is given to the natives free of charge,' &c, which -we think to be a full margin for this expense. The next item of expense is salt, which is the only article used to cure the skins. We will say that it takes 400 tons of salt—200 tons will do this, but on account of the short time in which seals are taken, it does not allow much time to use it over, which can be done two or three times. This salt at present is worth 9 dollars per ton in San Francisco, in small lots of 1 to 10 tons. We will say that it cost that for 400 tons, making expense of salt The next item is cost of transportation from the island to San Francisco. The steamer " St. Paul" is designed for this purpose. She made three trips during the year 1888, clearing from San Francisco for Ounalaska— 1st trip, cleared March 22, 1888. 2nd trip, cleared May 12, 1888. 3rd trip, cleared September 13,1888. Each time the manifest called for assorted goods and merchandize of various kinds, and fully one-half of which was consigned to other parts of Alaska, so that probably one-half of the expense of this steamer could be charged to other business, independent of the seal islands. On two of these trips she cleared with tliirty men, and once with thirty-one. The steamer is probably employed eight months in the year. The expense of this cannot be accurately estimated, but by estimating the expense of this vessel ... for the year, would, we think, give long margin, so as to include wear and tear, interest on investment, insurance, &c.; this would give expense a fair estimate until goods are laid in San Francisco. We will allow l| per cent, insurance to London, on, say, 1,250,000 dollars, winch would probably be the extent that these skins could be insured for, and which amounts to When the skins arrive in San Francisco they are packed hi casks, especially made for this purpose, which contain on an average 40 to 45 skins, calling 40 skins. This would make 2,500 casks. San Francisco market value of same is 2 dol. 25 c. each, making total expense We will give expense of packing in casks, drayage, and storage in San Francisco ... The freight at present time between San Francisco and New York, in carload lots, for seal-skins in pickle, is 2 cents per lb. When packed they will average nearly 16 lbs., and taking this as a basis, they would make nearly 1,600,000 lbs., at 2 cents per lb. We will say it cost one-half this amount to lay and deliver them iu London vi& steamer from New York, which, we think, is a large estimate This lays them in London ready for sale. The purchaser has a discount of 2|- per cent, allowed him, which is deducted from his purchase. This would make on 1,890,094 doL 29-96 c, amount realized for the skins C. M. Lampson and Co.'s charges for commission on the sale of salted fur-seal skins, which include insurance, storage, &c, after the goods are delivered to them, is 4 per cent. This gives total expense of catching, curing, and marketing the 100,000 seals Dol. c. 296,286 82 The estimate of cost Discount, 2\ per cent. Commissions, &c, C. M: Labour of the natives Lampson and Co. 51,850 00 30,000 00 3,600 00 30,000 00 18,750 00 5,375 00 5,000 00 32,000 00 16,000 00 47,252 35 75,603 76 559,367 93 296,286 82 47,252 35 ■75,603 76 51,850 00 470,992 93 These figures are practically correct, and can be verified. This amounts to within 88,375 dollars which is estimated, but the estimates are made long enough so that any Company obtaining the future lease of these islands can contract in San Francisco for this portion of the expense at these figures, and even less. 1 1COO. Having now found the actual cost, or near the same, of the 100,000 seals, we will go further and 265 find what these seals were sold for; we can then determine the profit, or near it, for the year i888 oh the 100,000 seals. The skins, after arriving in London, were sold on the 6th November, 1888, by C. M. Lampson and Co., at public sale at the London Commercial Sale Rooms, Mincing Lane, as per their catalogue, which can be obtained from all exporters of furs, or from all large fur houses in the principal cities of the United States. They were sold in lots, the largest lot of which contained 222 skins, and the prices ranged from 130s. per skin down to 29s. In order to get at the exact amount realized by the sale, we have assorted the lots, and find that they brought as follows:— 29 skins brought 120 „ 1,293 „ „ 413 „ 360 „ „ 1,660 „ 3,298 „ 2,240 „ „ 420 „ „ 65 140 „ 140 „ „ 280 „ 420 „ „ 140 „ „ 142 „ 143 „ „ 60 „ 242 „ 147 „ „ 183 „ 3,200 „ „ 9,600 „ „ 3.200 „ 177 „ 640 „ 368 „ „ 244 ,. 180 ,, 130s. each 1,098 skins brought 120s. „ 360 „ , 119s. „ 2,164 „ 118*. „ 360 „ », 117s. „ 2,303 „ ,. 116s. „ 24,660 „ ,t 115s. „ 3,420 „ „ 114s. „ 180 „ n 113s. „ 102 „ a 112s. „ 206 „ Ills. „ 56 „ „ 109s. „ 470 „ „ 107s. „ 1,377 „ j, 105s. „ 14,150 „ 103s. ,, 2,741 „ , 98s. „ 2,769 „ , 96s. „ 9,187 „ ,, 95s. „ 2,270 „ „ 94s. ,, 200 ,, ,, 93s. „ 1,054 „ i> 92s. „ 263 „ . 91s. „ 393 „ ,, 90s. „ 172 „ ,, 89s. „ 384 „ ,, 88s. „ 29 „ ,, 85s. ,, 31 „ „ 83s. „ 57 „ „ 82s. „ 16 „ i, 81s. „ 80s. each. 79s. „ Now, in summing up the different lots, I find that instead of there being only 100,000 skins, as represented at the beginning of Lampson and jCo.'s catalogue, consisting of 97,871 Alaska fur-seal skins, salted, and 2,129 Alaska seal skins, dressed natural, there was 100,016 skins, which realized 389,911/. 3s., which, when reduced to United States' money on the basis of 4 doL 84f c. to the pound sterling, amounts to 1,890,094 dol. 29-69 c, thus bringing on an average 18 dol. 89"79 c. per skin. We found that these skins brought Deducting the total cost of same . • Leaves a net profit of Dol. c. 1,890,094 29 -67 559,367 93 1,330,726 36-67 for the year 1888. Figuring this as general merchants do.it makes nearly a net profit of 238 per cent on the capital invested. Talk about your sugar trust, gas stock, Water Companies, railroads, &c, this , lays them all in the shade in the matter of profits. These figures are not mere guess work, but the facts, and any one by following the directions as specified can find vouchers for all these estimates. Having now shown the value of this privilege in a fair and business manner, we ask, is it right and just to the business men, merchants, capitalists, and persons of the United States who have money to invest, and are more than willing to invest where there is a reasonable chance for returns, that this privilege should be placed at the discretion of one man to decide who is the proper person to have this privilege ? Are we not right in this claim that if it is placed like any other Government contract that 600,000 to 800,000 dollars per year will be offered for this privilege, and by parties who will give as good bonds as can be had for the fulfilment of their contract ? Among the various methods for handling of the fur-seals, one is that the Government shall take charge of this, and conduct this business so as to derive all the benefit therefrom, which is not a bad one. Some would say the Government could not do this. It seems plain and easy. Let the Government take charge of this Reservation. The articles necessary to conduct the business could be bought the same as it now is, with ordinary supplies, by bids. A competent foreman can be obtained among its officers to superintend the killing and curing of the seal, as it requires no great skill to. do this. The Government steamer " Bear " could be used to transport supplies ou its trip to the Arctic in the spring and bring back to San Francisco the seal-skins on their return trip in the faU, thereby causing but Uttle expense, as on both trips to and from the Arctic they pass within 50 miles of these islands. The skins could be packed and shipped under the provision of the Government officials to C. M. Lampson and Co. for sale, and returns made direct to the Treasurer of the United States. This seems to be the best and most practical way to dispose of this franchise, thereby deriving all the benefits there may be in it to the Government. The privilege of conducting a general store on the islands could be sold the same as with other Reservations, as 113 families would undoubtedly support one good general merchandize store. Another way, which we think would be much better for the best interest of the people of the Pacific coast, wouid be as follows. Let the Government take charge of this Reservation, and, instead of killing 100,000, take 50,000 seals; and in doing this, let the selection be more thorough, so that the 50,000 skins shall be strictly 286 choice skins, that would average the highest possible.price. Then abandon the present,policy of claiming the Behring's Sea as an inland sea, which cannot be made to stand in the end. Restrict the killing of seal within the 3-mile or 6-mile limit, whatever is decided to be the limit of what a nation can hold authority over the high seas, and in this way it would promote the industry of private sealing to a much larger extent than it now is. A person not knowing the value of this industry would ask wherein it would be to the interest of the Pacific coast to promote the sealing industry by private individuals. The answer is, three-fourths of the money derived from the catch of the private sealer is put right into circulation in this manner; in fact, quite a large percentage is put into circulation before the vessel leaves port. In order to make this more plain, we will give the detail of the private-sealer business. In the first place, a vessel has to be secured; either by chartering or purchasing. The vessels employed in this business are mostly small schooners ranging from 40 to 110 tons burden, 70.tons being a fair average for size. We will say an order is given to our ship-yards for a vessel for sealing i-'-'BS1' Dol; c. ' For a new vessel of this description of 70 tons a fair price in San Francisco- is ... 7,000 00 . This is designed to carry six otter- or sealing-boats, aud a crew of twenty-one men. As soon as the vessel is received from the ship-yard, she has to' be furnished with her anchors, chains, spare ropes, an extra suit of sails, dishes, cooking utensils, and other articles top numerous to mention, of which ... ... ... ... ■ is a-low estimate. The next item is the six hunting-boats, with an average of 100 dollars each A complete new outfit of guns, rifles, and ammunition, ranging from 600- to 900 dollars; according to the ideas of the master or owner, which we will call Salt for Curing the skins ... ... ... ... ..Then comes the item of provisions, coal, &c, for a cruize of eight months for twenty-one men, would average : The slop-chest, which consists of clothing, blankets, boots and shops, tobacco and medicines suitable for a cruize, and which the law forces,all- masters to take, is estimated The vessel is now ready for sea except the crew. These as a rule go on a lay, but all being poor men, they generally have an advance paid to them, ranging from 20 to 100 dollars, and with a crew of twenty-one men a master may be considered lucky if lie gets off with less than ... ... ... ... ... ... • advance money for his crew. 2,500 00 600 00 750 00 100 00 900 00 450 00 1,200 00 Total expense to start with 13,500 00 This is as low an estimate as a vessel carrying six boats can be built and furnished for her first trip, with a reasonably fair outfit suitable to make a success of the business. This is near the actual expense which any one would be at to engage" in this business. Of course, this amount would immediately go into circulation. At the present time there are about fifteen American vessels on the Pacific coast engaged in this business. Now could this business be brought up to 115 vessels, it would require 100 new vessels and outfits, which would at once put into circulation 1,350,000 dollars at the lowest calculation possible, and would give employment to 2,100 men. We will now estimate the average catch of the private sealer at 10,000 dollars each. . This, one season with another, is a fair average catch.'and would realize 1,000,000 dollars for the 100 vessels. The crew, at the end of the season, come in to be paid off, and, as a rule, receive one-half of the catch, which amounts to 500,000 dollars. This is put immediately hito circulation, leaving the balance in the owner's hands to balance his outlay on the trip whatever net profit there may be in the business. We will say that it is divided between the 100 owners. Now these 100 owners support 100 families, as a rule, and spend much more than though it was made and handled by four or five men in a stock Company. This explains wherein it is to the best advantage for the Pacific coast to have this business open to any one who wished to invest in the same. It is plain to be seen if this extra amount of business could be distributed on the Pacific coast between San. Francisco, Portland, Port Townsend, Seattle, and other shipping points, it would promote all trade and business, with perhaps the exception of the hack-driver and undertaker. The Government at the same time would derive a large revenue on the sale of the 50,000 skins, enough to pay a dividend on the purchase of Alaska larger than it ever has done, and. have a margin to protect the seals on their breeding grounds, which is conceded by all should be done. We understand the objection made to the private sealers is made by those who do not understand how the hunting of seal is done. The reason for the objection is> that the private sealer will destroy all the seals and break up the seal rookeries. We ask: Has there ever been a seal rookery broken tip aud destroyed by hunters with, fire-arms when used at sea from 10 to 20 miles away from the rookeries, and in most instances 50 miles away from the rookeries ? We answer, No; it never has been done, and never can be done. In all cases where rookeries have been broken up it has been done by hunters directly on the beach where the seal land, and by hunting-and'killing, them indiscriminately, so that they could not land and have their young, and care for the same. The killing of seal from 10 to 20 miles away, from the rookeries is quite another thing. The seal there is not at the mercy of the hunter, as it has plenty of sea room, and is able to take care of itself, and is no easy game to capture, eveu by the most skilful hunter. This wiU be understood when it is considered that 2,500 seals is an: exceptionally good catch for a vessel carrying twenty-one men, who are generally out seven or eight months getting this many. This shows that the seal; when away from laad and at sea, is a hard animal to capture, and that they can never be exterminated by hunting at sea as now done, any more than the ducks and. geese. can be all killed, while on their way to and from breeding grounds in the Arctic. «SSP 287 We often see Reports about the seal-hunters, with remarks of the way they capture seals, claiming that many were shot and wounded, and couched in the most endearing manner that the poor seals were slaughtered by the hunters with shot-gun and rifle, so as to carry the impression that it was the most cruel business on the part of private sealers, and a business that should not be allowed, it being cruel in the extreme and unnecessary. We will now turn the tables, and ask was there ever a more cruel and brutal method invented for kiUing dumb, animals than is now practised in killing seals on the Islands of St. George and St. Paul. Imagine how these highly intelligent animals are gradually forced and driven away from the sea, their native element, driven inland as far as deemed practical. The slaughter then commences. Imagine a gang of men with clubs and. bludgeons knocking out their brains right and left, and if the seal is not hit right at the first blow it is followed up and slaughtered, its brains being knocked out by a club. Who can imagine a more cruel method than this for killing dumb animals ? Certainly the private sealer's method is the most humane of the two. Again, it is claimed that many seals are shot that sink and are lost. Undoubtedly there are some lost in this way, but the percentage is light, probably one in thirty or forty, not more than this. It is also claimed that ten are shot and wounded that die to one that is secured. This is also an" error. Many seals are shot at that are not hit at all, but when a seal is wounded, so that in the end it will die, it is most always secured by the hunter who may have to shoot at it several times in order to get it, as the seal in the water exposes only its head, and when frightened exposes only a small portion of that, so that, together with the constant diving of the seal, the motion of the boat, &c, makes it very hard to hit. This is where it is claimed that ten are shot and wounded to one that is secured, but it is nearer the truth that one is lost to ten that are secured, for the reason that when a seal is wounded it cannot remain under water any length of time, and therefore the hunter can easily follow it up and secure it We will now look at the Chart of the Behring's Sea and see on what grounds our Government claims this. You will notice a long chain of islands, called the Aleutian Islands, extending in the form of a circle to the westward, dividing the Pacific Ocean from the Behring's Sea. These islands are undoubtedly of volcanic formation, and while they extend some 1,200 miles to the westward, they do not inclose the Behring's Sea. The Island of Atton is our extreme western possession. The distance . from the Island of Atton to Copper Island is 175 miles, and to the nearest point of the Kamchatka coast or Siberian side, 370 miles. Now if our Government can claim and control a sea with a passage 370 miles across, we want to know how she is going to do it, and on what grounds. Certainly not that it is an inclosed sea. More especially, when you again look at the Chart, you see that the Island of Atton is at the extreme end of the chain of islands, and as you follow this chain of islands back to the eastward as far as Unimak Pass, that between these islands are wide passages, allowing vessels of the largest dimensions to pass in and out of the Behring's Sea at will, a distance of some 1,200 miles to the Siberian coast, in a direct westward line. By carefully perusing this Chart it must convince the sceptical.that our Government has no claim to the Behring's Sea as an inclosed sea. We now come to the question of the jurisdiction of the Behring's Sea as taken by our Government, caused by the seal question. For this reason the Chart of the North Pacific Ocean and the Behring's Sea is sent to you so that it may show just how broad the claim our Government has taken, in this matter. You will notice on the Chart of the Behring's Sea the line called the United States' imaginary boundary-line, called this for lack of no better name. This line has been laid out or imagined to exist in an open sea 1,200 miles across in its widest part, something never before claimed by any other Power in the history of the world. The impression has gone out that the Behring's Sea is an inclosed water, and under the full control of the United States and Russia. Just how or where this claim was first obtained no one seems to know. It sprang into existence like a mushroom, and apparently with about the same strength and standing. Our_Goxernment..could, with the same consistency, all of a sudden claim the control of the Gulf of Mexico. It is considered by all maritime laws that a nation can only control a certain distance of the sea from her shores. This has been the established custom as a maritime law for an indefinite time, and our Government insists that our American fishermen shall have all right outside of the 3-mile limit from land in the controversy between the Canadian and American fishermen, and would not consider the 10-miles headland point as asked by the Canadians, but when they come on the Pacific in the Behring's Sea they go directly back on what they claim on the eastern side, and say, We own all this sea, and if you are found in it your vessels are subject to seizure and yourself fined, making no allowance whatever for what portion you may be in, whether 1 mile or 100 miles from land. Our Government then going directly back on what it claims from the Canadian authorities on the other side, we ask, can this claim be held when it comes to a final issue ?. So far it has been done by force, but might is not always right, and can any one claim but what our Government will have yet to pay for the damages to the Canadians and her own citizens for the losses they have sustained by the. seizure of their vessels and forfeiture of same by our Government in its raid among the sealers in the year 1887 in the Behring's Sea. By what other rights has the United States to the Behring's Sea ? It is claimed that Russia ceded and sold to. the United States the full and absolute right and control of all the waters of the Behring's Sea. The question is, did Russia do this ? Did she sell this open sea, the public highway of the whalers, for an indefinite length of time in the past, to the whaling grounds in the Arctic—the highway of England via, the Yukun River to her possessions in the far north. She did not do it. . She sold her rights of the shore-line only, of which undoubtedly- she had a right to do. Russia, despots and tyrants as they have proved themselves to be in all their dealings with nations and private individuals, never has and does not to this day claim or exercise jurisdiction of the Behring's Sea, except the shore-line. American, English, and vessels of all nations are allowed to hunt, fish, and trade without molestation in the waters of Behring's Sea, adjacent to Russian possessions, providing they respect the shore-line. The Russian Consid at Yokahama has in the past, and undoubtedly does at the present, issue orders to parties fitting-out for hunting'in the Behring's Sea, \yarning them not to intrude on the shore-line, within so manymiles from shore, thus practically admittihgfthat she had no claim to this open high #1 H5H3 SKHSe 288 sea. Is not this fact alone sufficient evidence that she never sold to the United States what is-now claimed she sold ? She sold what she owned, and that was the shore-lure only. It seems that this imaginary boundary-line as set down on the Chart originated in imagination much the same as many stories, and after being told awhile is accepted as a fact and believed to be true, even by the person who first told th6 story. But when a thorough investigation is made, it is found that they will not hold water, and are matters of fiction only. Having now reviewed this question, we ask our eastern Congressmen and Senators and Eastern newspapers to examine the merits of this case, so that when this important measure comes up they will know the full value of the same, and will act in the way that will be for the best interest of the most people of the United States. When Alaska was purchased, it was undoubtedly designed to be for the benefit of the masses, and probably not to create a monopoly for the benefit of a few men only, thereby retarding the growth and development of this very valuable Territory. We also think the laws should be so amended that a person could acquire a title to property, and so changed that a white man could have the privilege of killing a mink or an otter for its skin without first marrying a squaw; as the law now reads, no white man is allowed to - Mil any fur-hearing animal unless he marries a squaw. This is not commonly understood, but is a fact, and is a queer state of affairs, and one that would not be relished by parents having sons that would like to go to Alaska, more especially if they should have seen the Reports of Miss Kate Field on the women of Alaska. It should not be forgotten that this is the first instance in the history of the Government of the United States in which it has ever pursued a policy tending to create a monopoly. All its laws relating to other portions of the public domain have been framed with a view to invite competition and prevent monopoly. Such is the spirit which has actuated and governed the pre-emption, homestead, mineral, and other laws relating to the public property. The theory has been that such public property has been vested in the Government, in trust, as it were, for all its citizens. The proposed legislation with respect to the Alaska seal fisheries will be the first exception to this universal policy. Indeed there is no species of the public property which has been more peculiarly regarded as the common heritage of all than the fisheries. Thus our Government has been for years past expending the most elaborate efforts, in time and money, to bring about such an adjustment of the Fisheries question on the North Atlantic coast as will open them to all American citizens. It is at least singular that, the moment we cross the continent, this established public policy should entirely change, and the waters of the Pacific be erected into a monopoly for the benefit of a single Corporation. In conclusion, we cannot help but review the fact that it would be vastly to the best interest of the Pacific coast, and to the whole of the people of the United States, that the Government should take charge of the seal islands, restrict the killing to 50,000 seals per year, abandon the present bad policy of the jurisdiction of the whole of Behring's Sea, and open the Territory to its full development. Our Eastern friends might ask us how it would benefit them. In the first place, it would open a profitable field for the employment of your idle capital. In the second place, half of the articles necessary to develop this Terrritory would be drawn from your manufacturers, such as hardware, canvas for sails, ship chandlery, guns, clothing of all description, such as waterproof and oil clothing, and, in fact, all branches of trade would derive some benefit from it. In the third place, it would open a field for the profitable employment of hundreds of your young men who are always on the watch for new fields to enter, so as to acquire wealth and a competency. We ask your careful attention of the facts set before you, and trust our efforts may not be in vain. Copies of this can be obtained by addressing C. D. Ladd, 529 and 531, Kearny Street, San Francisco, California, Salmon and Seal. The provisions of the Law to be strictly enforced. IN referring to the order, as reported, of the 15th March,* in regard to the salmon fisheries, this mention of dams would be supposed to apply to the present method of taking salmon, called fish-traps. This order, if carried into effect, will undoubtedly work great hardships to the salmon canneries now engaged in this business in Alaska. Section 3 reads that the publication of notice of seizure and confiscation of vessels shall be published one month in the papers at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast. With regard to this publication, it is earnestly hoped that it shall be plain, and clearly define just what the Government claims as its domain, whether it claims the shore-line or the whole Behring's Sea. In 1887 similar notices were published in San Francisco, but did not define what the Government claimed. In this year the Government vessel "Richard Rush," commanded by Captain Shepard, seized ten or twelve American and English schooners engaged in fur-seal hunting in the Behring's Sea, taking them wherever found, about 15 miles from land being the nearest that any was found and seized. One English vessel was 98 miles from land when seized, and others from 20 to 70 miles from land, and in * Washington, March 15.—In company with D. Brown Goode, of the United States' Fisheries Commission, Senator Stockbridge, Chairman of the Committee on Fisheries, to-day called upon Secretary Windom with reference to the Act recently passed for the protection of the salmon fisheries in Alaska. The Act makes it unlawful to erect or maintain any obstruction in the rivers of Alaska with the purpose or result of impeding or preventing the ascent of salmon to their spawning grounds, and affixes a minimum penalty: of 250 dollars a day for violation thereof. Last year, it is said, certain parties, by the aid of dams, captured millions of fish, and they are reported to be making ready for another.campaign this year. The matter has been referred to the Law Officers of the Treasury Department, who will at once prepare the necessary orders for carrying info effect the provisions of the Act. The last section of the Act. Senator Stockbridge says, will be carried out by the President in due time. Its adoption was a matter of serious concern to Congress, and its phraseology was changed by the Senate on Foreign Relations, and it was enacted into lair as follows. 289 no case was any vessel within the 3-mile limit, which is supposed to be what a nation holds and controls of the high seas. Captain Shepard in one instance when remonstrated with said: "We do not care where you are, whether 1 mile or 500 miles from land, we are going to take you anywhere in the Behring's Sea." This high-handed proceeding on the part of our (Jovernment caused a great deal of criticism from our newspapers and public men, and the public- sentiment, wherever the case wag fully understood, was that these seizures were illegal and could not be sustained. In 1888 the "Richard Rush" left San Francisco the 3rd July for its cruize in the Behring's Sea, and it was currently reported that the Captain's instructions were the same as in 1887. Upon the vessel's arrival at Ounalaska this'policy was changed, and no vessels were seized in 1888, the supposition being that none were found within the 3-mile limit. By this action the Government receded from the grounds : taken in the year 1887, thereby practically admitting that the seizures of 1887 were wrong and illegal.' Great injustice was done to the owners of American vessels engaged in this business in 1888 by the withholding of what the order was to be with regard to the Behring's Sea until the arrival of the | Richard Rush" in Ounalaska, thereby keeping out the American vessels-- The English masters at Victoria claim that they had advices from their Government at Ottawa, that no seizure woidd be made outside the .3-mile limit The result was that the English vessels went in, while the American vessels stayed outside. Hence this publication should by all means be explicit on this point in order that no ' one can be misled as they were last year. We now come to that part of the Revised Statutes (section 1956)* where the killing of any otter, ■ mink, martin, sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, it reads:—■ "Any person guilty thereof shall, for each offence, be fined not less than 200 dollars nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both, and all outfits confiscated." We ask, was there ever in the whole history of the world, a Law passed that showed quite the injustice that this does ? Can you find its parallel ? We doubt it when you look at the actual offence as compared with the value of the property taken. For instance, a miner on the Yukou kills a mink, •its market value being less than 1 dollar, he is subject to a fine of possibly 1,000 dollars and imprisonment for six months, with the confiscation of his boats, blankets, provisions, &c. The same Law would apply to a prospector should he kill a beaver or a bear and use it for food: both are fur-bearing animals, and are common in Alaska. The question comes up—for what reason has such a Law been passed? Is it to protect the fur- bearing animals of Alaska ?-j" On the face of it, it would seem so, but really such is not the case. A Law like this has a tendency to discourage all parties from going to Alaska to trap, hunt, prospect for mines, and this is what is wanted by those who control the trade of Alaska. It is not desirable that Alaska should become settled, and its resources fully developed. It is more desirable to their interests that white men should be kept away, and for this reason a Law like this is pushed through by some means or other, which on the face of it looks sincere, but when understood shows plainly the injustice of it, and the detriment to the best interests of Alaska, injustice to all residents of Alaska, and to all parties who would like to go there. It is an understood fact that no vessel can go to Alaska for trade . and make a success; it is impossible to buy furs from the natives to any extent. Why is this ? Simply, when a native sells his furs to an outside trader, he is cut off from trading at the various ports, and is ■ virtually considered aD outcast, hence they dare not do it. The longer that white men are kept out of Alaska, so much the longer this trade is controlled. White hunters and traders hunt and send their furs where they choose, hence it is desirable that all such persons should be kept out if p6ssible. It seems that these Laws are so framed in order to exclude competition and retard the development of Alaska instead of developing its resources as they should be, and open this vast country for the benefit of the whole people and not for the exclusive use of a few rich and. powerful Companies. An earnest appeal is made that these Laws shall be amended so that a white man can at ' least live in the country without being a criminal. Simple justice asks this, as the only practical resources of Alaska are its furs, fisheries, and mines. No. 206. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 10.) Sir, Downing St?\d, August 9, 1889. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of yesterday I am directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, for communication to the Marquis * Section 3. That Section 1956 of the Revised Statutes of the United States is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominions of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea, and it shall be the duty of the President, at a timely season in each year, to issue his Proclamation and cause the same to be published for one month in at least one newspaper, if any such there be published, at each United States' port of entry on the Pacific coast, warning all persons against entering said waters for the purpose of violating the provision of said section, and he shall also cause one or more vessels of the United States to diligently cruize in said waters and arrest all persons, and seize all persons found to be, or to have been engaged in any violation of the laws of the United States therein. f Section 1950 of the Revised Statutes is as follows : "No person shall kill any otter, mink, marten, sable or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal within the limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters thereof, and every person guilty thereof shall, or each offence, be fined not less than 200 dollars nor more than 1,000 dollars, or imprisonment not more than six months, or both, and all vessels, their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, found engaged in violation of this section, shall be forfeited, but the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such mink, marten, sable or other fur-bearing animals, eicept fur-seals, under such regulations as he may prescribe, and it shall bo the duty of the Secretary to prevent the killing of any fur-seal, and to provide for the execution of the provisions of this section until it is otherwise provided by law, nor shall he grant any special privileges under this section." [128] 2 P 290 of Salisbury, a copy of a further telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, respecting the seizure of the " Black Diamond " and " Triumph ":— " It appears from a telegram, dated the 8th August, from Ottawa, that all additional information respecting ' Black Diamond' and ' Triumph' is being sent to-day; steps have been taken to secure sworn affidavits as to exact location of seizures and boarding of those vessels." I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT/ No. 207. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 15.) Sir, Downing Street, August 14, 1S89. "WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 3rd instant respecting the seizure, by the United States' authorities of the " Black Diamond." in the Behring's Sea, I am directed, by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, and for such action upon it as his Lordship may think proper, a copy of a further letter from the High Commissioner for Canada inclosing a copy of a Petition to the President of the United States from the owners of the American schooner " San Diego," which appears to support the Canadian view respecting such seizures. The Orders in Council of the Canadian Government referred to Sir Charles Tupper were forwarded to the Eoreign Office in the letters from this Department of the 18th August last year and the 9th instant respectively. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 207. Sir C. Tupper to Lord Knutsford. 9, Victoria Chambers, Westminster, London, My Lord, August 9, 1889. WITH reference to my letter of the 2nd instant on the subject of the seizure of , British vessels in the Behring's Sea by the United States, I now have the honour to transmit, for your Lordship's information, a copy of a Petition to the President of the United States from the owners of the American schooner " San Diego," which seems to support the Canadian view of the matter. With regard to the American proposal for the establishment of a close time for the Behring's Sea in relation to the seal-fishing, I should like to refer your Lordship to the Order in Council of the Canadian Government, dated the 4th July, 1888, which deals very fully with this part of the question. I think both Lord Salisbury and your Lordship, after a careful perusal of this document, will come to the conclusion that the adoption of the proposal that is discussed would practically mean the exclusion of our fishermen from the Behring's Sea, while, at the same time, it would operate entirely to the benefit of the Alaska Commercial Company, with whose privileges it would not interfere. It also demonstrates, in my opinion, that there is no scarcity of seals; that any indiscriminate slaughter that takes place occurs on the islands on which the American Company pursues its operations, and that the seal-fishing industry might be extended considerably without any appreciable effect upon the supply. Supposing, however, that a necessity was found for some measures for protecting the seals, a proposition of the kind should be made upon a proper basis, which would operate equally against all, and not be a partial measure such as that suggested by the American Government, the adoption of which would be tantamount to the exclusion of British vessels from participation in the industry. I have no doubt that your Lordship has seen by this time the further Order in Council of the Canadian Government approved by his Excellency the Governor- General on the 29th June, 1889. This also contains information, much of it from American sources, proving beyond doubt the justice of the British claim to equal rights with the United States in the open waters of Behring's Sea. The right of the American Government to make Regulations with regard to the fishing on the islands 291 and the mainland, and in the waters within the 3-mile limit from the shore, is not disputed, but before the purchase of the territory; the United States dissented, in the strongest possible manner to any claim of exclusive jurisdiction by another Power in the open waters of the sea in question, and it is only comparatively recently that they have advanced their claim to regard the open sea "as United States'property. Her: Majesty's Government have always resisted such a contention, and I cannot doubt:i that they will now take such steps as will insure the-prompt-settlement of the question by the withdrawal of the-United States' Governmeht-'frora the position they have taken ; up, and not only thus enable British vessels to engage peacefully, without molestation in the fishery industry, in accordance with the rights conceded by international law,; but also demand reparation in favour of those persons whose vessels, equipment, and cargo have been seized, and of those who have in other ways suffered injury in ■consequence of the harsh, arbitrary, and unjust acts of the United States' Revenue ■cruizers. I have, &c. (Signed) CHARLES'TUPPER. Inclosure 2 in No. 207. Messrs. Handy and Co. to the President of the United States. 32, Clay ■ Street, Sa7i Francisco. UNDER the provisions of Article 2, Section 2, of- the Federal Constitution, as expounded in six opinions (Attorneys-General, p. 393), and in the case of ex parte Garland (4 Wall, 333), we herewith respectfully apply to you to remit the forfeiture adjudged against our vessel, the American schooner " San Diego/' her tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargo, in the District Court of the Unitod)$tates for the District of Alaska,: as appears by the papers on file in the office of the Secretary of ithe-Treasury, which, byr reference, are made a part of this Petition. The offence for which our vessel and cargo were jsslicialiy condemned -was)the killing1 of fur-seals in the waters of Alaska, contrary to the .Statute in such cases, made and provided. Remission and pardon are invoked upon the following grounds :— 1. That the offence was not, in fact, committed. 2. That, owing to the distance and inaceessibilifcyiiof the place of seizure, trial, and; condemnation, and the ignorance of the master of said schoonery <& fair opportunity^dM'i not offer itself to us to make an adequate defence agadnst the condemnation. 3. That although the trial and condemnation wareibadmnder a belief shared by all parties to the proceeding that an appeal would lie for either party, against the decision of the District Court of Alaska, and although such an appeal was duly taken in our behalf from the Judgment of Condemnation, it now appears exceedingly doubtful whether the Act of May 17, 1884, which organizes a judicial system for the territory of Alaska, permits rights of appeal in any case not strictly criminal. 4. Because the Attorney-General, in opinions rendered to the Secretary of the Treasury under dates of the 19th March and 16th April, 1887, has held that the remissory' power conferred upon the Secretary of the Treasury by sundry provisions of the Revised Statutes does not extend to our case. From the foregoing snmmary of the grounds of this Petition, it will be seen that we jire in danger of being for ever deprived of our property upon a doubtful state of facts without a full though a legal hearing, under an apparently mistaken belief on the part of the trial Judge and Council that means to review the decision of such Judge had been provided, and with no other effectual remedy now left to us than to resort to the constitutional power of the President to grant pardons and remissions. It has been said by Mr. Attorney-General Cushing (6 Opin., 488), that the power of remission is proper to be exercised in cases where doubtful questions of law are involved, or where parties are so situated that a due process of law cannot or has not been had. Our case is at least within the spirit of this opinion on both points, firstly, because we had not had, and seemingly cannot have, one fair day in Court, and secondly, because if our vessel had been engaged in killing seals in the waters alleged (a fact which we deny), it would be extremely doubtful if such killing would be an offence against any law of the United States. Upon this point we refer to the decision of Mr. Secretary Boutwell, of the Treasury [128] 2P2 292 Department, rendered in April 1872, wherein he held that the taking of fur-seals in Behring's Sea was not unlawful unless attempted within a marine league from the shore. We need not remind your Excellency that the same position is held to-day by the Government of the United States in the matter of the Canadian fisheries, and that the three British vessels lately seized and judicially condemned for seal killing in Behring's Sea have been released in obedience to the uniform and unswerving doctrine of our Government upon the question of what constitutes the high seas. When we add that our vessel was seized in the same waters at the same time, and condemned in the same Court upon precisely the same grounds as were these British sealers, recently set free, with title restored" to their owners, we believe that we have stated full, sufficient, and reasonable grounds why the repudiated headland doctrine should not lie against us. There is no pretence set up in the evidence submitted on the part of the Government that our vessel was sealing within the 3-mile limit, or was actually caught catching seals within the waters- of Behring's Sea. In the case of the "Ocean Spray," reported in 4 Law., p. 105, Judge Deady held that, to constitute a violation of Section 19.r>6, Revised Statutes, under which law our vessel was condemned, there must be an actual killing established. Permit me to observe that if the forfeiture in our case shall be permitted to stand, the anomalous spectacle is presented that alien persons and foreign vessels are permitted by our Government to pursue an industry and receive the mercy of pardon denied to citizens and vessels of the United States. No such distinction in matter of right and law between aliens and American citizens has ever been drawn by a Federal Administration. The facts of this case, as shown by the papers in the Treasury Department, which the Secretary of the Treasury has not been permitted to examine by reason of the adverse opinion of the Attorney-General upon the question of his power to remit, are as follows:— The American schooner "San Diego," of 36 tons burthen, owned by Messrs. L. N, Handy and Co., American citizens and merchants at San Francisco, was cleared at that- port for a general hunting and fishing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean, on or about the 28th February, 1886. She commenced seal killing off the Farallone Islands, about 20 miles from'the Golden Gate; continuing north, she hunted and fished on that ocean up to Ounalaska Pass, which she entered about the 24th June. Turning westward toward Copper Island, in the Russian waters of Behring's Sea, then heading eastward and south of the Aleutian Group, she made her way into the Pacific Ocean, and sailed eastward till Ounalaska Pass was again sighted. While operating outside this Pass, a coming storm induced the vessel to run through the Pass into Behring's Sea for safety, where she was befogged and without observation for three days. When the fog lifted, she was found to be off Ounalaska Island, 12 or 15 miles from any land. Here she was boarded from the Revenue-cutter % Corwin " [?] 17th July, 1886, and was seized because the boarding officer mistook the purpose of the master's answer, that he had killed a few seals in Behring's Sea; the master referring to some thirty seals taken near Copper Island, in Russian waters, and the boarding officer supposing him to admit that he had been sealing within the water boundary of the United States. The boarding officer was also misled by the presence of skins of recently killed seals on board, the explanation being^ that some twenty-two sealskins had been taken in the Pacific Ocean, off Ounalaska Pass, before running in for shelter, and had not been salted, because rough weather and fog had prevented the careful process cf cleaning, salting, and folding from being carried upon the deck of so small a vessel as the " San Diego." It appears that the owners of the " San Diego " had expressly instructed the master not to interfere with tbe privileges of the Alaska Commercial Company, nor violate the law in any particular, and, although we hold that, under the ruling of Mr. Secretary Boutwell, the diplomatic contention of one Government, and the doctrine recognized in the. recent release of the British sealing vessels, our vessel might lawfully have taken seals in the very place where the officer found her with fresh sealskins on board, we are obliged to adhere "to the contention that she did not. take any seals in that place nor anywhere thereabouts, because the evidence shows that not a skin was obtained in the whole of Behring's Sea, except near Copper Island, in the Russian jurisdiction. When discovered by the Revenue-cutter the vessel was entirely inactive, her sealing boats lashed on deck, waiting for an opportunity to get out upon the ocean to continue her business. It would appear from the testimony of Lieutenant Cantwell, of the Revenue-cutter, that he asked the master of the schooner if he did not know that it was illegal to take seals around here, and he answered that he did not know that it was against the law so long as he kept a marine league from the shore. This answer suggests a possible intention of taking seals in that vicinity if opportunity offered, but the fact is that no seals were taken, nor does it appear that any could have been taken up to the time of the seizure of the vessel if the wish and purpose to take them had existed. It is very evident EJ EEH w»a»yg»«opM^«rwwfJrw*tt 293 from the whole record that we, the present petitioners and sole prospective losers by the seizures of the vessel, never intended nor contemplated the taking of a single sealskin on that voyage in an unlawful or clandestine manner. Having openly cleared our vessel for a hunting voyage in the North Pacific, we knew that, in due course of administration, that fact would reach the Alaska Company, and the Revenue vessels employed for their protection ; hence it would be folly on our part to assent beforehand to any dubious or risky transaction by our agent, the master. Your Excellency will not fail to consider the United States' Attorney-General for Alaska against our application for the restoration of our vessel and cargo. The grounds of his opposition and our answers are as follows:— 1. The finding of the vessel in Behring's Sea, equipped for fishing, with fresh skins on board, together with the admission of the master that a few had been taken in Behring's Sea, raises a presumption against our present evidence that no seals were taken in Behring's Sea except near Copper Island. To this we answer, the vessel was openly fitted and dispatched for seal-fishing; that the fiesh skins on board could not reasonably have been cleaned, salted, and packed before seizure, and that the master had reference to his sealing operations near Copper Island when he said he had taken a few seals in Behring's Sea. 2. The District Attorney says that the answer of the master, that he thought seal- fishing lawful outside of a 3-mile limit, raises a presumption that he had been fishing outside, though within the water boundary of the United States; to which wc reply that this argument makes for rather than against our present application, because if the master thought he had the right to seal outside the 3-mile limit, his doing so would be innocent, in fact even if illegal at law. 3. Says the District Attorney,. the allegation that the vessel was driven through the Pass into Behring's Sea is improbable, and throws suspicion upon the merits of the case. This unimportant observation doubtless arises from confounding the voluntary passage of the vessel through the Pass to escape a storm, with a supposititious driving of tbe vessel through the Pass by the wind. 4. Says United States' Attorney' that, although the owners of the vessel were represented by Counsel, they did not produce at the judicial hearing the important testimony now offered ex parte. This argument is met by the circumstance that the owners, of the vessel had no opportunity to select Counsel for themselves, nor to influence the production of evidence and arguments in their behalf in that distant locality, and hence it would be hard to hold them responsible for a failure to produce evidence at the trial, which they admit the Counsel retained for them by the captain ought to have produced, and for the non- production of which said Counsel have been dropped from the case. The captain who employed the Counsel at Sitka thought his own testimony ought to have been taken, but he did not feel qualified to question the judgment of his attorneys. 5. The District Attorney believes the merits of the case can be better determined on the pending Appeal from the judgment than by an executive proceeding. This- argument is refuted by circumstances that, so far as the Statute Book shows, there is no Court in which the Appeal, taken at large to the Circuit having appelative jurisdiction, can be located or determined. 6. That the power to remit is an extraordinary one, and should be used restrictingly. This argument of the District Attorney has been long since answered by the Supreme Court, which has said that the laws imposing penalties are not to be construed strictly against persons or property for the benefit of the revenue, and that the laws conferring powers of remission are remedial in their nature, and should be liberally used for the benefit of those who have innocently incurred the sanction of the penal law. (10 Wheaton, 841, United States v. Morris, 106.) In conclusion, we-remind vour Excellency that no seals were in fact taken in or near the place where the Revenue officer supposed the "'San Diego " had been sealing; that, in point of law, no unlawful sealing was done by our vessel; that the British vessels seized at the same time, in the same locality, for the same cause, ana judicially condemned to forfeiture in the same Court, by the same Judge, and under the same circumstances as our own, have been released upon the ground of innocency; that without any actual fault of our own, we have, in fact, been deprived of a fair trial in the Court below, and, to all appearances, are left without further judicial remedy; that the remissory powers of the Secretary of the Treasury, by a probable oversight in the Statutes, do not reach our case; that personally we have been free from all evil intent, fault, or negligence throughout; and that while our agent, the master, did not take the seals within the American boundary of Behring's Sea, he might justly have done so in view of the ruling of Mr. Secretary Bout- 294 well, the diplomatic action of our own Government from the first to the present moment, and the general belief of merchants, lawyers, and all persons interested in the seal fisheries that such'fishing is lawful in any part of Behring's Sea, except near the islands of St. Paul, St. George, or within 3 miles of the shore. Having filed with the Secretary of the Treasury the papers upon which we rely to sustain the position taken therein, and convincing evidence of our good standing as citizens and merchants, we pray your Excellency to take this Petitiou into prompt and favourable consideration, and release us henceforth from the serious and continuing loss that we have undeservedly suffered, and are suffering, by the seizure and retention of our vessel and cargo, in which no third parties are interested as informers or captors. Respectfully submitted, (Signed) L. N. HANDY and Co., Commission Merchants. No. 208. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, August 17, 1889. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to request that you will state to Secretary Lord Knutsford that, in his Lordship's opinion, it is very desirable, pending the receipt of full details in regard to the recent seizure in Behring's Sea by the United States' Revenue- cutter "Rush" of the British vessels "Black Diamond" and "Triumph," that steps should be taken to proceed at once with the appeals to the Supreme Court of the United States in the cases of the British vessels whose sealing operations were stopped under similar circumstances in 1886. I am to request, therefore, that you will suggest, for Lord Knutsford's consideration, that a telegram should be sent to the Governor-General of Canada to the effect that, it being very unusual to press for diplomatic redress for a private wrong, so long as there is a reasonable chance of obtaining it from the Tribunals of the country under whose jurisdiction the wrong complained. of has occurred, Her Majesty's Government consider that tliey would be in a stronger position for dealing diplomatically with the Behring's Sea cases if appeals on the cases of seizure which took place in 1886 were pushed on. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 209. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received August 19.) My Lord, Washington, August 5, 1889. ON the 1st instant I had the honour to inform your Lordship by telegraph that the newspapers reported the seizure on the 11th ultimo by the United States' Revenue cruizer "Rush" of the British schooner "Black Diamond," sealing in Behring's Sea, being at the time of the seizure 70 miles from land. It was also reported that another British schooner, the "Triumph," was also boarded by the Captain of the "Rush," but no arrest was made, the seal-skins on board the " Triumph " having been captured in the Pacific, and not in the Behring's Sea. I have not up to the present date received any official information on the subject. There is, however, no doubt about the truth of the fact that the seizure of a British vessel has been made, and that another British vessel was stopped and searched, both occurrences taking place on the high seas, on the grounds that they had no legal rights to seal-fish in those seas. The question of the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States over the Behring's Sea is thus reopened, but it does not appear that any new feature in the case has presented itself. However, a novel situation is produced by the fact which is reported, that, after the seizure of the "Black Diamond," one of the crew of the United States' cruizer having been placed on board of her by the Captain of the "Rush," with orders to take her to Sitka, the Captain of the British vessel ignored the instructions of the man in whose charge she was supposed to be, and sailed for Victoria, British Columbia, where she is reported to have arrived safely. Had she gone to Sitka, she would, in all probability, have been declared by the United States' District Court of Alaska a lawful prize. As your Lordship will remember in the case of the British sealers which were seized during 295 the last two years, and after seizure were condemned by the United States' District Court of Alaska, the United States' Government agreed to release them on their owners giving bond to appeal to a higher Court. Few, if any of them, availed themselves of this permission, and they were ultimately sold by public auction. I have been given reason to believe by a lawyer of some standing in this city, that through some defect in the legislation affecting the territory of Alaska, the only appeal that could have been made in the matter would have been to the Supreme Court of the United States. I cannot anticipate that the United States' Government would try and justify before that Court the seizures by a pretension that the Behring's Sea is not an open sea. However much their action and the action of Congress may appear to put forward and maintain such a pretension, it is the general opinion that the Supreme Court would not hesitate to pronounce itself against it. On what the United States' Government would base their claim to exclusive seal- fishing rights in the Behring's Sea it is difficult to foresee, but in conversation a short time ago with a politician of very high standing under the late Administration, I learnt that the following argument has been brought forward and used by one or more of the most prominent lawyers in the Houses of Congress. They maintain that the "seal nation" in those seas has its domicile, breeding-grounds, &e, on United States' territory, where it is carefully preserved and protected by United States' law, and consequently they do not admit that the seal loses its nationality when its habits cause it to temporarily absent itselt from its home. From what I gathered from the gentlemen above referred to, I feel confident that this was one of the chief arguments which might have been used by the United States' Government had the matter been brought up to the Supreme Court during the time that the late Adminstration was in power. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. No. 210. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 20.) Sir, Downing Street, August 19, 1889. WITH reference to your letter of the 17th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram wbich has been addressed to the Governor-General of Canada in connection with the Behring's Sea seizures in 1886. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 210. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Colonial Office, August 18, 1889. IT is very unusual to press for diplomatic redress for a private wrong as long as there is a reasonable chance of obtaining it from the Tribunals of the country. Her Majesty's Government consider that they would be in stronger position for dealing diplomatically with Behring's Sea cases if appeals on 1886 seizures were pushed on. No. 211. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 21.) Sir, Downing Street, August 20, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, with its inclosures, containing information respecting the recent seizure of the schooner "Black Diamond" and the detention of the schooner " Triumph " in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. rHTi^TCTnglfcff^Mff^HiatfgM urn 296 Inclosure 1 in No. 211. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. j My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, August 8, 1889. IN transmitting to your Lordship such information as I have been able to procure up to the present time respecting the recent seizure of the schooner " Black Diamond," and the detention of the schooner "Triumph," in Behring's Sea, I deem it my duty to bring to your notice the very strong feeling which is arising throughout the Dominion consequent upon the continued seizures of Canadian vessels upon the open sea, and their condemnation in the United States' Courts of law. A sense of irritation is growing up in the public mind not only against the Government of the United States, but against the Imperial Government, which may at any moment result in serious trouble, and there is reason to apprehend that, if the supposed inaction of the Home Government continues, the sealers mav be driven to armed resistance in defence of what they believe to be their lawful calling, and it would be difficult, if not impossible, for the Dominion Government to prevent such a state of affairs. 1 had the honour recently to inclose to your Lordship a Minute of the Privy Council containing a very full recital of the past history of the so-called Behring's Sea question, and I must express the earnest hope that your Lordship will move the Foreign Office to take such steps as may tend to an early settlement. Up to the present time there has been every disposition on the part of the Canadian people to rely on the maintenance by the Imperial Government of the international rights which the Foreign Office is charged with the duty of protecting, and if the question of the free navigation of the North Pacific (or Behring's Sea) were fully maintained, I do not think that any reasonable measures which could be proposed for the protection of the (so-called) seal fishery would meet with a refusal here. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. ' Inclosure 2 in No. 211. Lieutenant-Colonel John Tilton to Sir John Macdonald. (Telegraphic") Victoria, July 30, 1889. SIR JOHN THOMPSON requests that the following telegram, just received, addressed to Honourable Mr. Tupper from Victoria, signed E. Crow Baker, may be repeated to you :— " British schooner ' Triumph' arrived yesterday evening from Behring's Sea. Master reports seizure of British schooner 'Black Diamond' with catch of sealskins by American Revenue-cvuizer 'Rush,' 70 miles off land. Boarding officer informed master that all vessels found with President's Proclamation and recent instructions (sic) issued by Secretary of Treasury (sic). ' Triumph' had no skins on board, and therefore escaped immediate confiscation. Is it not possible to afford protection to some twenty Canadian schooners ..still there prosecuting their legitimate business, and liable to immediate seizure if not already seized ? Steamer j Sardonyx ' leaves with coal for British war-ships now at Port Simpson on Thursday next. Please reply immediately what steps Federal Government will now take in the matter. Meeting to-day of those interested, who strongly urge this " message. Senator Macdonald of Toronto heartily endorses action of owners here. In meantime sealing business interests completely paralyzed." Inclosure 3 in No. 211. Extract from the " Ottawa Evening Journal," of July 31, 1889. The Sealer Seizure. San Francisco, Cala, July 30.—The steamer "Dora," from Behring's Sea, brings the first detailed news of the capture of the British sealer " Black Diamond," by the United States Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," on the 11th July. The " Rush " overtook the "Black Diamond" and ordered her to heave-to, The captain of the "Black Diamond" refused. Thereupon the commander of the | Rush " ordered a lowering of ports and 297 running out of guns, which caused the steamer to heave-to. Captain Shepard and Lieutenant Tuttle boarded the English craft and asked for her papers. The officers of the ■"Black Diamond" offered no armed resistance, but lefused to deliver the papers. Captain Shepard at once broke open the cabin, and foiced the lunges off the strong box and the captain's chest, thereby securing the papers. A search of the vessel disclosed 10,000 sealskins, which had been taken in Behring's Sea. Captain Shepard placed a noncommissioned officer from the " Rush " in charge of the | Black Diamond," and ordered the vessel to be taken to Sitka to await further instructions. The captain of the " Black Diamond " stated that when in Victoria he had been ordered to pay no attention in case he was overtaken by the " Rush " and requested to heave-to. He said he would not have surrendered if the " Rush" had had an inferior force to his own. On the 1st July the schooner " Triumph " was also boarded by Captain Shepard, but no arrest was made, the . skins on board having been captured in the Pacific. A passenger who arrived on the I Dora" said: " On our way down from St. Paul's Island we saw six sealers and the "Rush" pursuing. Undoubtedly by this time the "Rush" has made additional captures." Captain Shepard's Report. Washington, July 30.—A telegram from Captain Shepard, commanding the Revenue- steamer " Rush," says he seized the " Black Diamond " for violation of section 1956 of the revised statutes. This section was incorporated in the President's Proclamation of the 21st March, on the subject of seal fisheries. It forbids the killing, by unauthorized persons, of seal and other fur-bearing animals within the limits of Alaska or in the waters thereof. The penalty provided is a fine of from 200 dollars to 1,000 dollars, or imprisonment for not exceeding six months, or both, and the forfeiture of the vessels violating the law. Inclosure 4 in No. 211. Extract from the " Ottawa Citizen" of August 3, 1889. Behring's Sea Troubles. (By telegraph to the " Citizen.") Washington, 2nd.—The seizure of the British sealing-vessel "Black Diamond" by the Revenue-cutter " Rush " is believed 'to be the beginning of a series of seizures which must lead to some definite understanding between the United States and Great Britain on the subject. Great Britain has emphatically expressed the opinion that the United States' Government has no jurisdiction over the Behring's Sea outside the 3-mile limit. Our Government proceeds on the assumption that it has a right to protect the seal in any part of the Behring's Sea, although the State Department has never stated that assumption in direct terms, and all its official utterances on the subject carry the conviction of the Department's consciousness of inability to establish the claim on the basis of any Treaty agreement or international law. Even the Acts of Congress do not anywhere assert a claim over the whole of Behring's Sea, but only over Alaskan waters or the waters adjacent to Alaska and to our islands in Behring's Sea. Indeed, the one plea upon which the United States' Government captures sealing-vessels all over the thousands of miles of water within Behring's Sea is that the welfare of mankind requires that the seal shall be protected from poachers. The English Government agrees that the seal should be carefully protected and preserved, but contends that it has a right to be consulted as to the method of protecting the seal on the open sea. The United States' Government is unwilling to take other Governments into partnership in the business, because the seal really belongs to the Pribylov Islands, although it sometimes strays to distant waters to spend the winter. Nevertheless, when it comes to a crisis, this Government will probably have to admit that it has no right to say, independent of other nations, that seal shall not be taken 200 or 300 miles from shore. It would not be surprising if some serious collisions should occur between the seal-hunters and our Revenue-cutters. The sealers are out in numbers, and the seizures that are sure to be made this summer must bring things to a crisis and lead to a settlement of right in the matter. Sir Julian Pauncefote will have big business to attend to when he returns to Washington.. He will doubtless bring back with him some urgent representations from [128] 2 Q 298 Lord Salisbury. Sir Julian said before sailing for England that up to that time the subject had not been talked of at all between himself and the State Department here. The seizure and search of the "Triumph," which was afterwards released because no sealskins were found on board, may be a more serious matter than the seizure of the "Black Diamond," for it involved the right of the United States to seize and search suspected vessels outside of what are conceded to be the limits of the jurisdiction of the,' United States. Bangor, Me., 1st.—Secretary Blaine passed through this city this evening en] route to Bar Harbour. A reporter called his attention to a declaration in a Boston paper that it would be impossible for the national Government to " sustain the pretension of Secretary Blaine that Behring's Sea is distinctly American water." The Secretary of State simply remarked that it might be well for the paper in question to indicate the occasion, official or unofficial, where he said anything at all on that point. Mr. Blaine; added that everything done on the fur-seal question since the 4th of last March was in literal compliance with the directions contained in the Act of Congress which was approved by President Cleveland on the last day of his term. Inclosure 5 in No. 211. Extract from the " Ottawa Citizen " of August 6, 18S9. - Victoria, B.C., 5th.—The most astonishing things that has happened here since the foundation of the town was the arrival in the harbour yesterday of the " Black Diamond,": Captain Thomas, which, on the 11th July last, was seized by the American Revenue-cutter "Rush," for the alleged illegal capture of seals in Behring's Sea. Captain Thomas, the moment he stepped ashore, was met by the owners of the schooner, and to them he reported the facts connected with the interruption of his vessel's sealing trip. He sighted j the Revenue-cutter " Rush" on the 11th July, 5 miles away. He "was catching seals at the time, and was 70 miles off shore. He immediately made sail, intending to elude the cutter and avoid any possible trouble. The wind, unfortunately, wras rather light, and the "Rush's" engines enabled her, inside of an hour, to overhaul the " Black Diamond." The Commander of the " Rush" at first signalled the schooner to heave to, but no attention being paid to the order by Captain Thomas, the " Rush" steamed almost alongside, her Commander shouting out his order for her to lay to. This he did three times, but Captain Thomas still paying no attention to him, he steamed ahead of the "Black Diamond " and lay across her bows, compelling Captain Thomas to haul his vessel up sharply and lay to. Then Lieutenant Tuttle, three other officers, and two boat-loads of Yankee sailors • came aboard and began making an examination of the " Black Diamond " hold. Captain Thomas demanded an explanation, when Lieutenant Tuttle informed him that his vessel was under seizure for the illegal catching of seals, and demanding the " Black Diamond's " papers. Captain Thomas indignantly repudiated the charge that he was acting illegally, and refused to give up his papers. Lieutenant Tuttle argued, demanded, and threatened, and finally, after three distinct, emphatic refusals on Captain Thomas' part, ordered his seamen to break open the cabin lockers and find what the Captain refused to give up. The papers were found, and Lieutenant Tuttle took possession of them, refusing to Captain Thomas' repeated demands to return them. An American sailor named John Hawkins was then left aboard by the Commander of tbe '"'Rush," who informed Captain Thomas that he and his mate were under arrest, that the schooner was to be taken to Sitka, that the crew were not to be detained; but that the vessel was to be delivered over to the United States' Collector of the Port of Sitka, who would take whatever further action should be thought necessary by the American authorities. Written instructions to this effect were given to Hawkins, and, after a thorough search of the schooner, Lieutenant Tuttle, with his officers and men, departed, and shortly afterward the "Rush" steamed off toward some other vessels in sight. Captain Thomas said nothing to Hawkins, but putting up the port helm headed toward the Alaskan shore. Four days later the " Rush" was passed by the "Black Diamond, there but did not hail her; the schooner was headed in the proper direction, and was no necessity for speaking to eacn sl-c other. But the day the "Black Diamond " reached the harbour of Ounalaska, in the island of that name, forming oue of the Fox Islands in the Aleutian group, and went inside in the hope of finding there an English man-of-war. The place was deserted however, except by natives, so Captain Thomas, without any ado, turned his vessel about, heading for the passage leading into the Pacific Ocean, and, reaching that, headed straight for Victoria, where he arrived as described ^j5B 299 iabovc. Captain Thomas said he wasn't going to let any one Yankee sailor take him captive into Sitka, and, as seaman Hawkins appears to have had very little to say about the matter after the " Rush " departed, the Canadian kept his determination. There was no violence on the " Black Diamond." Hawkins, as soon as he sawr that Captain Thomas didn't intend to sail the schooner, into Sitka, seems to have made some sort of a protest, ineffectual, of course, and then settled down to a realization of the truth "of saying that "there's many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip.'' He was quite hopeful, when he came ashore to-day, that he wouldn't be swung from a yard arm for not obeying orders. In the face of his predicament he was in fact remarkably cheerful. He proceeded at once to the American Consulate, where, handing over his instructions to the United States' Consul, he made a statement of what happened, as he saw it, since the " Rush" •parted with him. His history of the affair has been telegraphed to the authorities at Washington. The utmost satisfaction is felt here at the escape of the " Black Diamond," particularly among the sealers and the owners of sealing-vessels, and Captain Thomas is beinsr made a lion of for his conduct in the matter. w*m Inclosure 6 in No. 211. Extract from the " Ottawa Citizen" of August 6, 1889. Is it a Backdown r Washington, District of Columbia, 5th August.—[Special."]—In some quarters the running away of the " Black Diamond" is looked upon as nothing more or less than a surrender of the position taken by the United States on the Behring's Sea question. It was so'stated this morning by an ex-official of the Government, and, upon my asking for his reason for such a view, he simply referred to the course pursued by the Treasury and State Departments in 1888 as a sufficient answer. According to his theory, the seizure •of the "Black Diamond" was all for effect, and her arrival at a British port was nothing more nor less than what was expected. The Treasury people with whom I conversed on the subject scouted this position as most absurd. They state that Captain Shepard was carrying out his instructions, and would never have seized the "Black Diamond" unless he was convinced that the laws of this Government on the fur-seal matter had been openly and unquestionably violated. Full particulars by mail are to reach the Treasury Department not later than Wednesday next. Captain Shepard will explain the seizure of the I Black Diamond," and this, the Treasury people say, will fully explain his action on breaking open the cabin and taking possession of the ship's papers. The action of Captain Shepard has given rise to considerable comment in official circles. One of the gentlemen with whom I talked, and who is well informed, said the "Black Diamond" will be seized the first time she appears in American water for this same offence, but it will be a long time before the opportunity for such a seizure occurs, and there is no law by which the case can be reached otherwise. The vessel was seized and got away, and that is the whole story in a nut shell. The British Charge d'Affaires has not received any information as yet regarding this new development in Behring's Sea. Inclosure 7 in No. 211. Extract from the " Toronto Globe" of August 1, 1889. More Details. Victoria, British Columbia, Z\st July.—Captain McLean, of the British sealer " Triumph," which has arrived here from Behring's Sea, is reticent about affairs in the north. It is stated by others on the vessel, however, that wheD the "Triumph "was sighted by the " Rush " there were thirty seals dead lying on the " Triumph's " deck.' These are hurriedly skinned, and the pelts hidden among a large quantity of salt. This salt also formed a heavy coating to about 800 sealskins which lay in the bottom of the schooner. Lieutenant Tuttle made an examination, but seeing nothing but salt departed. The men on the " Triumph" say that Captain Dodd, of the "Mac," had said he would fire on any American officers attempting to board his vessel. Lieutenant Tuttle told Captain McLean he had seen five schooners entering Behring's Sea on the 4th July, viz., "Maggie Mac," "Triumph," "Mary Ellen," "Lillie L.," and | Black Diamond." The [128] 2 Q 2 300 latter was captured, but the fate of the others is unknown. The "Corona " arrived to-day. Captain Carroll says when he left Juneau, Wednesday, the British men-of-war " Swiftsure," "Icarus," and " Arnphion" were there; they left for Port Simpson on the following day. The 1 Corona" heard nothing of the seizures. A number of prominent sealing men waited on the Captain of the British man-of-war " Champion," which sailed to-day for the north to join the fleet, and gave him full particulars in writing. He will convey them personally to Admiral Heneage. A deputation also waited on the Honourable John Robinson, Provincial Secretary; he has telegraphed to Ottawa demanding protection of the Imperial Government. Telegrams also have been sent by the most prominent public men of the province. The action of the Imperial Government is anxiously awaited. if No. 212. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, August 22, 1889. HER Majesty's Government are in receipt of repeated rumours that British vessels have been searched and even seized in Behring's Sea, outside the 3-mile distance from any land. No official confirmation of these rumours has yet reached Her Majesty's Government, but they appear to be authentic. I have to instruct you to inquire of the United States' Government whether any similar information has reached them. You will also request that stringent instructions may be issued as soon as practicable to the officials of tbe United States to prevent the possible recurrence of such incidents. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 213. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, August 22, 1889. WHEN you make the communication to Mr. Blaine, as instructed in my previous despatch of this day's date, relative to the recent seizures of British vessels in Behring's Sea, I should wish vou to remind him that clear though unofficial assurances were given last year by Mr. Bayard that, pending the general discussion of the questions at issue between Her Majesty's Government and that of the United States, no further interference should take place with British ships in Behring's Sea at a distance from the shore. You will find the record of such an assurance conveyed to me through Mr. Phelps in my despatch to Sir L. West of the 3rd April, 1888, and Sir C. Tupper informs me that Mr. Bayard gave personally similar assurances to him and the other members of the Commission sent to Washington. !rir J. Pauncefote will be prepared to discuss the whole question when he returns to Washington in the autumn; but you should point out that a settlement will only be hindered should the United States' authorities resort to measures of force against British ships beyond the 3-mile limit, against which Her Majesty's Government must necessarily protest as contrary to the principle of international law, which the United States have not only acknowledged, but have themselves firmly and publicly maintained. I am, &c. (Signed SALISBURY. No. 214. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, August 26.) My Lord, Newport, August 26, 1889. I HAD the honour to receive on the 23rd instant your Lordship's two telegrams of the 22nd ultimo, instructing me to inform the Secretary of State that repeated rumours had of late reached Her Majesty's Government that United States' cruizers have stopped, .>^tjy7ft,Tjp;ry-*Wff>w^aA^»j*^».»:»?\ la-rygggi 55515 101 searched, and even seized British vessels in Behring's Sea outside the 3-mile limit from the nearest land: that although no official confirmation of these rumours bad reached Her Majesty's Government, there did not appear to be any reason to doubt their authenticity. Your Lordship desired me at the same time to inquire whether the United States' Government were in possession of similar information, and to ask that stringent instructions should be sent at the earliest moment, with the viewT to prevent the possibility of such occurrences taking place. In speaking to Mr. Blaine on the above subject, your Lordship instructed me to remind him that Her Majesty's Government had received last year very clear assurances from Mr. Bayard, at that time Secretary of State, that, pending the discussion of tbe general questions at issue, no further interference should take place with British vessels in Behring's Sea, and, in conclusion, to state that Sir J. Pauncefote would be prepared, on his return to Washington in the autumn, to discuss the whole question, adding that Her Majesty's Government wished to point out that a settlement could not but be hindered by measures of force on the part of the United States. 1 accordingly left at once for Bar Harbour (Maine), where Mr. Blaine has been passing the summer, and on the morning of the 24th instant I called on him, and made a communication to him in the above sense. Mr. Blaine at once asked me to address to him a note containing the substance of your Lordship's instructions. He said that he was unable to give a reply uutil he had consulted with the President, but be promised that I should receive one to the note I was to address to him at a very early date. All that he could say to me then was that similar rumours had reached the United States' Government, which were probably authentic, although no official confirmation had been given to them, and he could say to me, in further reply to my communication, that he was of opinion that there was little divergence in the views of the two Governments on the points at issue. On the termination of my interview with Mr. Blaine, I dispatched to your Lordship a telegram informing you of what had taken place, and then, in accordance with Mr. Blaine's request, I addressed to him a note, a copy of which I have the honour to inclose. Tn the afternoon of the same day I met Mr. Blaine, and he told me that he had addressed a letter to me containing the reply he had made to me earlier in the day. I had \ the honour to forward to your Lordship by telegraph the substance of this reply, a copy of which is herewith inclosed. This reply, as your Lordship will see, commences by saying that rumours of the search and seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' cruizers have reached the United States' Government, and that although no official confirmation of those rumours has been received by them, they appear to be based on truth. Mr. Blaine then goes on to say that it has been and is the earnest desire of the President of the United States to have such an adjustment as shall remove all possible ground of misunderstanding with Her Majesty's Government concerning the existing troubles in the Behring's Sea, and that the President believes that the responsibility for delay in that adjustment cannot be properly charged to the Government of the United States, and he begs me to express to your Lordship the gratification with which the Government of the United States hears that Sir J. Pauncefote will be prepared on his return to Washington in the autumn to discuss the whole question. Mr. Blaine concludes his letter by saying that he has pleasure in assuring me that the Government of the United States will endeavour to be prepared for the discussion, and that, in the opinion of the President, the points at issue between the two Governments are capable of prompt adjustment on a basis entirely honourable to both. I acknowledged Mr. Blaine's letter in a note, a copy of which is herewith inclosed (Inclosure No. 3), informing him that I should lose no time in bringing his reply to the knowledge of Her Majesty's Government, who, while awaiting an answer to the other inquiries I had the honour to make to him, would, I felt confident, receive with much satisfaction the assurances which he had been good enough to offer to me, I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES, z«a !302 ■ • ■ Inclosure 1 in No. 214." Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. "Sir, Bar Harbour, August 24, 1889. IN accordance with instructions which I have received from Her Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, I have the honour to state to you that repeated rumours have of late reached Her Majesty's Government that United States' cruizers have stopped, searched, and even seized British vessels in Behring's Sea outside the 3-mile limit from the nearest land. Although no official confirmation of these rumours has reached Her Majesty's Government, there appears to be no reason to doubt their authenticity. I am desired by the Marquis of Salisbury to inquire whether the United States' Government are in possession of similar information, and further to ask that stringent instructions may be sent by the United States' Government at the earliest moment to their officers, with the view to prevent the possibility of such occurrences taking place. In continuation of my instructions, I have the honour to remind you that Her Majesty's Government received very clear assurances last year from Mr. Bayard, then Secretary of State, that pending the discussion of the general questions at issue, no further nterferdnce should take place with British vessels in Behring's Sea. In conclusion, the Marquis of Salisbury desires me to say that Sir Julian Pauncefote, Her Majesty's Minister, will be prepared, on his return to Washington in the autumn, to discuss the whole question, and Her Majesty's Government wdsh to point out to the United States' Government that a settlement cannot but be hindered by any means of force which may be resorted to by the United States' Government. 1 have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. Inclosure 2 in No. 214. Mr. Blaine to Mr. Edwardes. Sir, Bar Harbour, Maine, August 24, 1889. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of this date, conveying to me the intelligence "that repeated rumours have of late reached Her Majesty's Government that the United States' cruizers have stopped, searched, and even seized British vessels in Behring's Sea outside the 3-mile limit from the nearest land." And you add that, " although no official confirmation of these rumours has reached Her Majesty's Government, there appears to be no reason to doubt their authenticity." In reply, I have the honour to state that the same rumours, probably based on truth, have reached the Government of the United States, but that up to this date there has been no official communication received on the subject. It has been, and is, the earnest desire of the President of the United States to have such an adjustment as shall remove all possible ground of misunderstanding with Her Majesty's Government concerning the existing troubles in Behring's Sea, and the President believes that the responsibility for delay in that adjustment cannot be properly charged to the Government of the United States. I beg you will express to the Marquis of Salisbury the gratification with which the Government of the United States learns that Sir J. Pauncefote, Her Majesty's Minister, will be prepared, on his return to Washington in the autumn, to discuss the whole question. It gives me pleasure to assure you that the Government of the United States will endeavour to be prepared for the discussion, and that, in the opinion of the President, the points at issue between the two Governments are capable of prompt adjustment on a 'sasis entirely honourable to both. I. have, &c. (Signed) J. G. BLAINE. K-rJ9*vwt9.*miw.K KMhmiWWIim'gi'l'ri'HiiHrJwmj J 303 Inclosure 3 in No. 214.. Mr. Edtvardes to Mr. Blaine. Sir, Bar Harbour, August 25, 1889. I HAD the honour to receive yesterday your note, in which you have been good enough to inform me, with respect to the repeated rumours which have of late reached Her Majesty's Government of the search and seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea by United States' cruizers, that the same rumours, probably based on truth, have reached the United States' Government, but that up to this date there has been no official communication received on the subject. At the same time, you have done me the honour to inform me that it has been, and is, the earnest desire of the President of the United States to have such an adjustment as shall remove all possible ground of misunderstanding with Her Majesty's Government concerning the existing troubles in Behring's Sea, and that the President believes that the responsibility for delay in that adjustment cannot be properly charged to the Government of the United States. You request me at the same time to express to the Marquis of Salisbury the gratification with which the Government of the United States learns that Sir J. Pauncefote, Her. Majesty's Minister, will be prepared, on his return to Washington in the autumn, to discuss the whole question, and you are good enough to inform me of the pleasure you have in. assuring me that the Government of the United States will endeavour to be prepared for the discussion, and that, in the opinion of the President, the points at issue between the. two Governments are capable of prompt adjustment on a basis entirely honourable, to both. I shall lose no time in bringing your reply to the knowledge of Her Majesty's Government, who, while awaiting an answer to the other inquiries I have had the honour to make, to you, will, I feel confident, receive with much satisfaction the assurances which you. have been good enough to make to me in your note of yesterday's date. , I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. No. 215. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received August 29.) Sir, Downing Street, August 29, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, with a Report of the Committee of Privy Council of the Dominion, with telegrams from Mr. Baker and the Collector of Customs at Victoria, respecting the seizure of the " Black Diamond'' and the "Triumph" by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush." I am to request to be informed what answer Lord Salisbury would propose should be returned to this despatch. I am, &c. (Signed) EDWARD WINGFIELD. Inclosure 1 in No. 215. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, August 9, 1889. I HAVE the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting telegrams dated the 30th ultimo, from E. C. Baker, Esq., M.P., and the Collector of Customs at Victoria, Brifph Columbia, with reference to the seizure in Behring's Sea, 70 miles from land, of the British sealing- schooner " Black Diamond," with her cargo of sealskins, and to the searching in these waters, in the same locality, of the British schooner | Triumph," by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," and requesting that the attention of Her Majesty's Government be invited thereto, with the earnest hope that an early assurance will be given 304 that British subjects peacefully pursuing their lawful occupations on the high seas will be protected. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No, 215. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, August 2, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 31st Jul\r, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting telegrams dated the 30th ultimo, from E. C. Baker, Esq., M.P., and the Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, with reference to the seizure in the Behring's Sea, 70 miles from land, of the British sealing-schooner " Black Diamond," with her cargo of sealskins, and to the searching in these waters, in the same locality, of the British schooner " Triumph," by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," the Master of the " Triumph " being informed that immunity from the seizure of his vessel was due solely to the fact that she had no sealskins on board. The Minister represents that four years have elapsed since the seizure of British sealing-vessels was commenced by the United States' authorities in the Behring's Sea, and the strong representations of Her Majesty's Ministers to the United States have only resulted in a continuance of the policy, and a declaration that such policy will be systematically pursued. The Committee advise that copies of tbe annexed telegrams be transmitted to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, with the request that the attention of Her Majesty's Government be invited thereto, and with the earnest hope that an early assurance will be given that British subjects peacefully pursuing their lawful -occupations on the high seas will be protected. All of which is respectfully submitted for approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 215. Mr. Crow Baker to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, Ottawa. [See Inclosure 2 in No. 211.] Inclosure 4 in No. 215. Mr. Hambly to the Hon. M. Bowell. (Telegraphic.) SCHOONER " Triumph " searched by officer of United States' Revenue-cutter the 11th July in Behring's Sea. No skins. Vessel released. Officer told Master that same day "Black Diamond," having skins, was seized. Both vessels 70 miles from land. Officer said orders were to seize every vessel, British or American, with skins on board. No. 216. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.— (Received September 2.) Sir, Downing Street, September 2, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salishury, a copy of a telegram which has been sent to the Governor-General of Canada respecting the Behring's Sea difficulties. 1 am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. vpv|tf7^/>y^2»|iM>'BIWarai!aEag«!TggS3W*1T'nsHIT: tilMifrHM 305 Inclosure in No. 216. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, August 31, 1889. SEIZURES of British vessels in Behring's Sea. Her Majesty's Charge d'Affaires at Washington reports United States' Government have no information beyond what we. have. Mr. Blaine asked that the substance of Lord Salisbury's instructions might be embodied in a note, and promised early reply. He said it was necessary first to consult President. He apprehended no serious divergence between two Governments, and expressed his own very sincere desire for a joint settlement of Fisheries and Behring's Sea questions, and dwelt on very friendly feelings of President Harrison's Administration. ■ In a further telegram substance of Mr. Blaine's letter is given, saying that the same rumours, probablv authentic, had reached his Government, but have not been confirmed officially. The letter expresses the earnest desire of the President for an adjustment removing all possible ground for misunderstanding concerning the troubles in Behring's Sea, and satisfaction at learning that Sir J. Pauncefote will discuss question on his return. United States' Government will prepare for discussion, and President thinks points at issue are capable of prompt adjustment on basis honourable to both Governments. A third telegram states that Mr. Blaine had promised a very early reply whether instructions would be sent to Alaska in order to prevent possible recurrence of such incidents. No. 217. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, September 2, 1889. I HAVE laid before tbe Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 29th ultimo, forwarding a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada and a Report of the Committee of the Canadian Privy Council on the action of the United States' Revenue- cutter " Richard Rush'.' in seizing the British sealing-vessel " Black Diamond," and searching another vessel, the " Triumph," in the waters of Behring's Sea. In reply to your inquiry as to the answer to be returned to this despatch, I am directed by his Lordship to suggest that Lord Stanley should be informed that Her Majesty's Government are in communication with that of the United States with the object of procuring instructions which will prevent any further seizures. I am, at the same time, to request that you will point out to Secretary Lord Knutsford that as yet no authentic and detailed information has reached this Department as to the circumstances attending the seizure and searching of these or other British vessels by the United Stat6s' authorities during the present fishing season. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 218. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 3.) Sir, Downing Street, September 3, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence, and particularly to the letter from this Department of the 29th ultimo, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a further despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, containing with other inclosures a cutting from a local newspaper respecting the searching of the " Triumph," and a telegram from the Collector of Customs at Victoria in connection with the arrival of the " Black Diamond " at that port. I am to request that the inclosures to Lord Stanley's despatch may be returned to this Department when done with. I am, &c. (Signed) EDWARD WINGFIELD. [128] 2 R 306 Inclosure 1 in No. 2IS. Jififfff Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, August 15, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 9th instant, I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting a copy of a despatch from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, together with a cutting from the "Colonist" containing Captain McLean's statement of the circumstances under which his vessel, the "Triumph," was searched, and also a copy of a telegram from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, giving information as to the arrival of the seized schooner " Black Diamond " at that port. T have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 218. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the ' Governor-General in Council, on the Wth August, 1889. THE Committee of Council have had under consideration a despatch, dated the 30th July, 1889, from the Lieutenant-Governor of British Columbia, respecting the seizure of the British schooner " Black Diamond " by the United States' cutter " Richard Rush," 70 miles from land, and transmitting a cutting from the "Colonist," a British Columbia newspaper, containing Captain McLean's statement of the circumstances under which his vessel, the " Triumph," was searched, and also a telegram from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, giving information as to the arrival of the seized schooner " Black Diamond " at Victoria. The Committee advise that copies of these communications be transmitted to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for the information of Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted for approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 218. Lieutenant-Governor Nelson to the Secretary of State, Ottawa. Sir, Government House, Victoria, July 30, 1889. I HAVE the honour to inform you that Captain McLean, of the sealing-schooner "Triumph," just arrived from Behring's Sea, has brought news of the seizure of the British schooner | Black Diamond " by the United States' cruizer " Rush " for sealing in that sea. I inclose cutting taken from the "Colonist''newspaper, giving an account of Captain McLean's statement. I have, &c. (Signed) HUGH NELSON. Inclosure 4 in No. 218. Extract from the " Colonist." The Sealing-schooner "Black Diamond" seized by the Revenue-gutter "Rush," and dispatched to Sitka.—Sunday evening considerable excitement was caused in the city, more especially in commercial circles, when it became known that the sealing-schooner | Triumph " had arrived in harbour, bringing with her the news of the capture of the schooner " Black Diamond," and her own narrow escape from, the same fate. The particulars of the case are as follows :— At about 6 o'clock on the evening of the 11th July a steamer was sighted from the deck of the "Triumph," and Captain McLean at once concluded that the vessel was a United States' cutter, either the "Bear" or the "Rush." The exact locality of his agMin^TOinrCTM *—"»»*»—jj«—*~—^— 307 schooner at the time Captain McLean did not know, but, as nearly as he could judge, he was 100 miles to the westward of St. George's Islands, in Behring's Sea. The steamer followed in his wake for two hours, and at dusk came alongside and ordered him to heave to. He at [?] obeyed the order, and a boat's crew, with the Chief Officer of the " Rush " (Mr. Tuttle), boarded her. The captain stood at the gangway, and asked the officer his reasons for boarding the schooner. The answer was the production of written orders authorizing | the capture of any vessels illegally sealing in Behring's Sea." He then asked to be allowed to search the ship, aud on permission being accorded him he spent over half-an-hour with his men in overhauling the vessel. No find rewarded his search, however, the whole of the skins aboard having been dexterously hidden in time to avoid detection. When the search was concluded the officer turned to Captain McLean, and, after expressing his pleasure at not being under necessity to seize his vessel, informed him that a few hours before, the " Rush " had come up with and boarded the schooner " Black Diamond." He had found aboard her 104 sealskins, and on discovering these had put the second officer in charge, and dispatched the captured sealer to Sitka. He also stated that it was the intention of his Commander to capture every vessel illegally sealing in Behring's Sea, and send them to American ports in charge of American officers. He then ordered his crew to return to the " Rush," and, as soon as they were aboard the steamer, headed full speed away to the west. At the time of boarding, the " Triumph " had aboard her about 300 skins. The I Black Diamond " is owned by Messrs. Guttman and Frank, of this city. Yesterday morning, when the facts of the case became generally known, Captain Cox, Mr. H. Saunders, and Mr. W. Munsie formed themselves into a deputation, and decided to leave for Esquimalt immediately, and interview the captain of the " Champion " on the subject. Commander Sinclair received the deputation very courteously, and, on learning the object of their visit, ordered his secretary to take down all the statements made. The facts of the case were then put before him, and the visitors protested against the menace to the sealing industry by the acts of the United States' Revenue-cutter. It was represented that out of fifty-five sealing-schooners that have entered Behring's Sea this season twenty-four belong to Victoria, and that if the acts of the American Government were not speedily put a stop to, the sealing industry of Victoria would be ruined. All the members of the deputation signed the statement, and Commander Sinclair told them that, although he could do nothing himself, he would lay everything before the Admiral as soon as he joined the fleet. He further advised them to collect all other available information on the subject and dispatch it to Admiral Heneage by the steam-ship " Sardonyx," which sails on Thursday next for Port Simpson. On arrival in the city the deputation was joined by Mr. Richard Hall and Captain Grant. Senator Macdonald, of Toronto, was*then interviewed at the Driard, and at once threw himself into the subject, going with the deputation to Mr. E. Crow Baker, M.P., and the Honourable Mr. Robson, Provincial Secretary. A telegram containing the whole of the facts was dispatched to the Honourable the Minister of Marine and Fisheries at Ottawa by Senator Macdonald, and it is expected that an answer will be received in time for it to be dispatched to the Admiral by the " Sardonyx." The Honourable Mr. Robson also dispatched a separate telegram to the Minister of Marine on the same subject in Inclosure 5 in No. 218. Telegram from Victoria, B.C., to Mr. Bowell, Minister of Customs, Ottawa, ONE man from Revenue-cutter placed on board " Black Diamond," with orders to take her to Sitka. Vessel's master and crew remained on board, and brought her straight to Victoria. Vessel's papers, clearance, coasting licence, and certificate of registrary, also salted skins, taken from her by officer of Revenue-cutter. No. 219. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received September 6.) Sir, Admiralty, September 4, 1889. I AM commanded by my Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit herewith, for the information of the Secretary of State, copy of a letter from the Captain of [128] 2 R 2 * ttamu-mm^j... yCTg?*jCTCS ESSBEBCSnS Behring 308 Her Majesty's ship "Champion," dated the 30th July last, with copy of its inclosure, respecting the capture of an English sealing-schooner by a United States' cruizer in the Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) R. D. AWDRY. Inolosure 1 in No. 219. Captain St. Clair to Rear'Admiral Heneage. Sir. " Champion," at Esquimalt, July 30, 1889. I HAVE the honour to report, for your information, that during the forenoon of the 29th instant a deputation of owners of sealing-schooners came on board this ship at Bsquiraalt to report that an English sohooner had been captured in the Behring's Sea by a United States' cruizer. A copy of their statement is attached. I informed them that 1 would submit their statement to you on my arrival at Port Simpson. I have, &c. (Signed) A. F. ST. CLAIR. Inclosure 2 in No. 219. Statement made by Owners of Sealing-Schooners at Victoria, B.C. THE English schooner "Triumph," Captain McLean, arrived at Victoria last evening (28th July) from Behring's Seas, and reported that she was boarded in these seas en the 11th instant at 8 p.m. by the American steamer "Rush," Lieutenant-Commander Shepherd, at longitude 170° west, and 70 miles off the shore. The Commander of the "Rush" searched the vessel and found no seals on board. He ordered her (the " Triumph") out of the seas, and said if she was found there again She would be taken prisoner to Ounalaska. Lieutenant Shepherd, of the " Rush," also had informed Captain McLean that he had that day seized the English schooner " Black Diamond," and his instructions were to seize all vessels found in these seas. A prize crew had been put on board the " Black Diamond," and the vessel sent to Ounalaska. f (Signed) JOHN GRAHAM, Owner of Schooner " Sapphire." WILLM. MIMSIL, Owner of Schooners " Viva," " Pathfinder," and " Mary Taylor." H. SAUNDERS, Owner of Schooner " Ourel." I Champion," at Esquimalt, July 29, 1889. No. 220. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes. Sir, Foreign Office, September 9, 1889. I HAVE to express to you my approval of your proceedings, as reported in your despatch of the 26th August last, with reference to the representations you were instructed to make to the United States' Secretary of State in regard to the seizures of British vessels in the waters of Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. nywaMmw^ 309 No. 221. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, September 9, 1889. WITH reference to your letter of the 3rd instant, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to request that you will move the Secretary of State for the Colonies to cause a telegram to be sent to tbe Governor-General of Canada, requesting his Excellency to furnish Her Majesty's Government with immediate information if any further stoppage of vessels in Behring's Sea takes place. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 222. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 10.) Sir, Downing Street, September 10, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of Canadian sealers in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for communication to the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor- General of the Dominion, with its inclosures, on the subject. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 222. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Citadel, Quebec, August 26, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of the " Black Diamond " and the detention of the " Triumph " in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward, herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting copies of the instructions given to the special officer placed on board the " Black Diamond i by the Captain of the United States' Revenue-cutter "Rush," and of a letter from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, together with the affidavits of the masters of the two vessels. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 222. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 22nd August, 1889. ON a Report dated the 13th August, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in reference to the seizure in the Behring's Sea of the schooner " Black Diamond '' and the boarding of the schooner " Triumph," the original instructions given to the special officer placed by the Captain of the United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush " on board the " Black Diamond " at- the time of the latter's seizure, and also a letter from the Honourable W. Hamley, Collector of Customs at Victoria, British Columbia, together with the following affidavits :— 1. Affidavit of Owen Thomas, of Victoria, British Columbia, master of the British sealing schooner "Black Diamond." 2. Affidavit of Daniel McLean, of Victoria, British Columbia, master of the British sealing schooner " Triumph." The Minister recommends that copies of the inclosures herewith be immediately forwarded, for the information of Her Majesty's Government. The Committee concurring advise that your Excellency be moved to forward this JUMJUJ iilSlgMflMMlUBa 310 Minute, together with copies of the inclosures, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All of which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council Inclosure 3 in No. 222. Captain Shepard to Mr. Hankanson. United States' Revenue-steamer " Rush," Behring's Sea, Lat. 56° 22 N, Long. 170° 25' W., Sir, July 11, 1889. YOU are hereby appointed a special officer, and directed to proceed on board the schooner " Black Diamond," of Victoria, British Columbia, this day seized for violation of Law, section 1946 Revised Statutes of the United States, and assume charge of said vessel, her officers and crew, twenty-five in number, all told, excepting the navigation of the .vessel, which is reserved to Captain Owen Thomas, and which you will not interfere with unless you become convinced that he is proceeding to some other than your port of destination, in which event you are authorized to assume full charge of the vessel. Everything being in readiness, you will direct Captain Owen Thomas to make the best of his way to Sitka, Alaska, and upon arrival at that port you will report in person to. the United States' District Attorney for the district of Alaska, and deliver to him the letter so addressed, the schooner "Black Diamond," of Victoria, British Columbia, her outfit, and the persons of Captain Owen Thomas and Mate Alexander Galb, and set her crew at liberty. After being relieved of the property and persons intrusted to your care, you will await at Sitka the arrival of the " Rush." I have, &c. (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD. Inclosure 4 in No. 222. Mr. Hamley to the Customs, Quebec. Sir, Cvstom-house, Victoria, August 5, 1889. I FORWARD herewith, in original, the orders given by Captain Shepard, of the United States' • Revenue-cutter " Rush," to J. Hankanson, special officer, to proceed on board the British schooner "Black Diamond," seized in Behring's Sea, and to take her fo Sitka. The master of the schooner reports to me that the Indians employed as hunters in the schooner would, he believes, have murdered Hankanson if an attempt had been made to take her to Sitka. The master got out of the sea and sailed at once for Victoria, without any opposition on the part of Hankanson, and I think it is very probable that the orders given him privately by the Captain of the " Rush " were not to interfere in any way with the destination of the vessel. He arrived here on Saturday evening, the 3rd August; the object of the Revenue-cutter was no doubt attained in taking her skins, rifle, and Indian spears away, and sending the vessel out of Behring'3 Sea. Her certificate of registry was also taken away. Shall I give her a fresh certificate ? 1 have, &c. (Signed) W. HAMLEY. Inclosure 5 in No. 222. In the Matter of the Seizure of the Sealing-schooner "BlackDiamond" by the United States' Revenue-cutter "Richard Rush," on the 11th day of July, 1889. Deposition of Owen Thomas. I, OWEN THOMAS, of the city of Victoria, British Columbia, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare that— 1. I am a master mariner, and was at the time of the occurrences hereinafter men- g«22aaZSa£OT«Kusa=atHH 311 tioned and still am the master of the schooner " Black Diamond," of the port of Victoria? British Columbia. 2. On the 11 th day of July, a.d. 1889, whilst I was on board and in command of the said schooner, and she being then on a sealing expedition, and being in latitude 56° 22' north and longitude 170° 25' west, and at a distance of about 35 miles from land, the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush " overhauled the said schooner, and, having hailed her by shouting, a command which I could not distinctly hear, steamed across the bows of the said schooner, compelling her to come to. A boat was then lowered from the said cutter, and Lieutenant Tuttle and five other men from the United States' vessel came aboard the said schooner. I asked the Lieutenant what he wanted, and on his stating he wished to see the ship's papers, I took him down to my cabin and showed them to him. He then commanded me to hand the papers over to him. This I refused to do, and locked them up in my locker. At this time there were 131 sealskins aboard the schooner, 76 of which had been salted, and 55 of which were unsalted, and Lieutenant Tuttle ordered his men to bring up the skins, and to take the salted ones on board the "Richard Rush." The cutter's men accordingly transferred all of the salted skins from my schooner to the " Richard Rush," and also took aboard the cutter two sacks of salt and a rifle belonging to the schooner. Lieutenant Tuttle then again demanded me to give up the ship's papers, and told me that if I would not give them up he would take them by force. As I still declined to part with them he signalled to the cutter, and a boat came off with the Master-at-Arms, who came on board the schooner. Lieutenant Tuttle asked me for the keys of the locker so that he might get the papers out, and upon my refusing to give them to him he ordered the Master-at-Arms to force open the locker. The Master-at-Arms then unscrewed the hinges of the locker, took out the ship's papers, and handed them to Lieutenant Tuttle. Lieutenant Tuttle then returned to the. "Richard Rush," and came hack to the schooner again, bringing on board with him one whose name I have since heard to be John Hawkinson, and who I believe to be a Quartermaster of the "Richard Rush." Lieutenant Tuttle then told me to take the schooner to Sitka. I told him that I should not go unless he put a crew on beard to take the schooner there. He gave Hawkinson directions to take the ship to Sitka, and gave him letters to give to the United States' authorities on arrival. Lieutenant Tuttle, before leaving my schooner, ordered twenty Indian spears which were aboard for sealing purposes to be taken on to the " Richard Rush." I asked the Lieutenant to give me a receipt for the papers, skins, &c, he had taken. This he refused to do, and he then returned to the "Richard Rush," taking the said spears with him, and leaving the man Hawkinson in charge of the schooner. Shortly afterwards the cutter steamed away, without returning the ship's papers, sealskins, and other goods before- mentioned. After the departure of the United States' vessel, I directed my course to Ounalaska, hoping to meet with an English man-of-war. We arrived there on the 15th day of July. My crew at this time consisted of a mate, Alexander Gault, two white seamen, deck hands, and a white cook, and twenty Indians. The Indians, thinking we were going to Sitka, became mutinous, and told me the best thing I could do to avoid trouble was to take the schooner home. They also warned the other white men on board that if they thought I meant to take the schooner to Sitka, they would throw us all overboard. There being no man-of-war at Ounalaska I left there and directed my course to Victoria, and arrived at that port at about 7 p.m. on Saturday, the 3rd August last, having on board the said John Hawkinson, who, during the cruize to Victoria, had not tried to give me any directions, or made any suggestions as to the course to be taken by the schooner. On arrival at Victoria Hawkinson was put ashore by one of my boats. And 1 make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Oaths Ordinance, 1869. Declared at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, the 7th day of August, 1889, before me, (Signed) (Signed) Ernest V. Bodwell, A Notary Public for the Province of British Columbia. OWEN THOMAS. 1 312 Inclosure 6 in No. 222. Deposition of Daniel McLean. I, DANIEL MCLEAN, of the city of Victoria, in the province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, being duly sworn, depose as follows :— That 1 am master and part-owner of the British schooner "Triumph," registered at tbe port of Victoria, British Columbia; that, in conformity to laws of the Dominion of Canada, I regularly cleared the said schooner " Triumph" for a voyage to the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and that, in pursuance of my legitimate business, did enter the said Behring's Sea on the 4th day of July, 1889, and did in a peaceful manner proceed on my voyage, and being in latitude 56° 05' north, longitude 171° 23' West on the 11th day of July, 1889. At the hour of 8*30 a.m. was hailed by Commander of United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," the said Revenue-cutter being a vessel belonging to the Government of the United States and regularly commissioned by the same; a boat having been lowered by officer and crew, I was boarded by the same, the officer in charge of the boat heing one Lieutenant Tuttle, who demanded the official papers of my vessel, and, after reading the same, proceeded to search my vessel for seals, and finding no evidence of the same informed me that orders had been issued by the Secretary of the United States, under the Proclamation of the President, instructing the Commanding Officer of the said Revenue-cutter " Rush " to seize all vessels found sealing in Behring's Sea; he also told me that should he again board me and find sealskins on board, that he would seize and confiscate the vessel and catch ; he furthermore informed me that he had already seized the British schooner " Black Diamond " of Victoria, British Columbia, and that she had been sent to Sitka, and that, therefore, by reason of his threats and menaces, I was caused to forego my legitimate and peaceful voyage on the high seas and return to the port of my departure, causing serious pecuniary loss to myself, crew, and owners, for which a claim will be formulated and forwarded in due course. And I make this solemn affidavit, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Oaths Ordinance, 1869. (Signed) DANIEL McLEAN, Master of Schooner " Triumph." Sworn before me this 8th August, 1889, at Victoria, British Columbia. (Signed) Geo. Morison, J.P., A Justice of the Peace for the Province of British Columbia. No. 223. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 12.) Sir, Downing Street, September 10, 1889. IN reply to your letter of the 9th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to acquaint you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, that the Governor-General of Canada has to-day been requested to send immediate information if any further stoppage of vessels takes place in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 224. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 14.) Sir, Downing Street, September 13, 1889. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to transmit to you, for communication to the Marquis of Salisbury, with reference to previous correspondence, a copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, containing information in respect of the recent seizures in Behring's Sea, and stating that affidavits were being forwarded. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. 313 Inclosure in No. 224. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) (Received September 29,1889.) SEIZURES of British vessels in Behring's Sea. "Black Diamond" seized 11th July; " Minnie," 15th July; "Juanita," 31st July; I Pathfinder," 27th August; " Triumph" warned off, being threatened with seizure, 11th July. Official information recently received at Ottawa respecting " Minnie," " Juanita," " Pathfinder." Affidavits being forwarded. Seizure of " Lily" reported ; affidavit when received at Ottawa will be forwarded. Seizing officers removed skins, ammunition, arms, and ship's papers. No. 225. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received September 14.) (Extract.) Downing Street, September 13,1889 WITH reference to your letter of the 2nd instant, and to previous correspondence respecting the seizures of Canadian sealers in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for communication to the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram which has been sent to the Governor-General of the Dominion on the subject. Inclosure in No. 225. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, September 6, 1889. HER Majesty's Government communicating with United States' Government with a view to preventing further seizures in Behring's Sea. No authentic and detailed information received as to seizures during the present fishing season. Appeal in case of 1886 seizures might be expedited by motion on meeting of Supreme Court October, but case could not be heard till spring. No. 226. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, September 20.) (Extract.) Washington, September 17, 1889. ON the 11th instant I had the honour to receive your Lordship's telegram informing me that it would be better that I should write privately to Mr. Blaine, saying that Her Majesty's Government were earnestly expecting an answer to their request that the United States' Government would send to Alaska such instructions as would put a stop to the seizures of British vessels, the reports of which seizures were causing much excitement both in England and Canada. I now have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of the private letter which, in accordance with the terms of your Lordship's above telegrams, I addressed to Mr. Blaine on the 12th instant. Inclosure iu No. 226. Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. (Personal.) My dear Mr. Blaine, Washington, September 12, 1889. I SHOULD be very much obliged if you would kindly let me know when I may expect an answer to the request of Her Majesty's Government, which I had the honour of communicating to you in my note of the 24th August, that instructions may be sent to Alaska to prevent the possibility of the seizure of British ships in Behring's Sea. Her Majesty's Government are earnestly awaiting the reply of the United States' Government mm 2 S ffgm 314 on this subject, as the recent reports of seizures having taken place are causing much excitement both in England and in Canada. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. No. 227. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received September 30.) My Lord, Washington, September 19, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 17th instant, I have the honour to inclose herewith to your Lordship a copy of a note which I have received from the Secretary of State in reply to my personal note of the 12th instant, in which I inquired of him when I might expect an answer to the request of Her Majesty's Government that instructions may be sent to Alaska to prevent the possibility of the seizure of British ships in Behring's Sea. Mr. Blaine states that he had supposed that his note of the 24th August, copy of which was inclosed in my despatch of the 26th August, would satisfy Her Majesty's Government that the President, was earnestly desirous of coming to a friendly agreement on all matters at issue between the two Governments in relation to the Behring's Sea, and that he bad further supposed that my mention to' him that Sir Julian Pauncefote would be officially instructed to proceed, on his return to Washington, tc a full discussion of the question removed all necessity of a preliminary correspondence touching its merits. Mr. Blaine then goes on to say that, with reference more particularly to the question to which I had informed him Her Majesty's Government were expecting a reply, a categorical response would have been and still is impracticable, unjust to the United. States' Government, and misleading to Her Majesty's Government, and that it was therefore the judgment of the President that the whole question could more wisely be remanded to the formal discussion so near at hand, which Her Majesty's Government have proposed, and to which the United States' Government have cordially assented. The Secretary of State concludes by stating that he considers it proper to add that any instruction sent to Behring's Sea at the time of my original request, namely, the 24th August, would have failed to reach those waters before the proposed departure of the vessels of the United States. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. Inclosure in No. 227. Mr. Blaine to Mr. Edwardes. Sir, Bar Harbour, Maine, September 14, 1889. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your personal note of the 12th instant, written at Washington, in which you desire to know when you may expect an answer to the request of Her Majesty's Government " that instructions may be sent to Alaska to prevent the possibility of the seizure of British ships in Behring's Sea." I had supposed that my note of the 24th August would satisfy Her Majesty's Government of the President's earnest desire to come to a friendly agreement touching all matters at issue between the two Governments in relation to Behring's Sea, and 1 had further supposed that your mention of the official instruction to Sir J. Pauncefote to proceed, immediately after his arrival in October, to a full discussion of the question removed all necessity of a preliminary correspondence touching its merits. Referring more particularly to the question to which you repeat the desire of your Government for an answer, i have the honour to inform you that a categorical response would have been and still is impracticable, unjust to this Government, aud misleading to the Government of Her Majesty. It was therefore the judgment of the President that the whole subject could more wisely be remanded to the formal discussion so near at hand, which Her Majesty's Government has proposed, and to which the Government of the Uuited States has cordially assented. It is proper, however, to add that any instruction sent to Behring's Sea at the time of i mm TmTrrvmt^YWW7Va Jg"»n^™™°™™»B" aaaam T3B 315 your original request, upon the 24th August, would have failed to reach those waters before the proposed departure of the vessels of the United States. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. No. 228. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes. Sir, Foreign Office, October 2, 1889. IN my despatch of the 17th August 1 furnished you with copies* of a correspondence which had passed between this Department and the Colonial Office, on the subject of.the seizure of the Canadian vessels "Black Diamond" and "Triumph" in the Behring's Sea by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush." I have now received, and transmit herewith, a copy of a despatch from the Governor- General of Canada to the Secretary of State for the Colonies,! which incloses copies of the instructions* given to the special officer placed on board the "Black Diamond" by the Officer commanding the | Rush " and of a letter from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, together with the sworn affidavits of the masters of the two Canadian vessels. It is apparent from these affidavits that the vessels were seized at a distance from land far in excess of the limit of maritime jurisdistion which any nation can claim by international law. The cases are similar in this respect to those of the ships " Caroline," " Onward," and " Thornton," which were seized by a vessel of the United States outside territorial waters in the summer of 1887. In a despatch to Sir L. West dated the 10th September, 1887, which was communicated to Mr. Bayard, I drew the attention of the Government of the United States to the illegality of these proceedings, and expressed a hope that due compensation would be awarded to the subjects of Her Majesty who had suffered from them. I have not since that time received from the Government of the United States any intimation of their intentions in this respect or any explanation of the grounds upon which this interference with the British sealers had been authorized. Mr. Bayard did indeed communicate to us unofficially an assurance that no further seizures of this character should take place pending the discussion of the questions involved between the two Governments. Her Majesty's Government much regret to find that this understanding has not been carried forward into the present year ; and that instructions have been issued to cruizers of the United States to seize British vessels fishing for seals in Behring's Sea outside the limit of territorial waters. The grounds upon which these violent measures have been taken have not been communicated to Her Majesty's Government, and remain still unexplained. But, in view of the unexpected renewal of the seizures of which Her Majesty's Government have previously complained, it is my duty to protest against them, and to state that, in the opinion of Her Majesty's Government, they are wholly unjustified by international law. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. . No. 229. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes. Sir, Foreign Office, October 2, 1889. AT the time when the seizures of British ships hunting seals in Behring's Sea during the years 1686 and 1887 were the subjects uf discussion, the Minister of the United States made certain overtures to Her Majesty's Government with respect to the institution of a close time for the seal fishery, for the purpose of preventing the extirpation of the species in that part of the world. Without in any way admitting that considerations of this order could justify the seizure of vessels which were transgressing no rule of international law, tier Majesty's Government were very ready to agree that the subject was one deserving of the gravest attention on the part of all the Governments interested in those waters. The Russian Government was disposed to join in the proposed negotiations, but they were suspended for a time in consequence of objections raised by the Dominion of Canada, [128] "Nos. 202, 203, and 204. t No. 222. 2 S 2 S3W 316 and of doubts thrown on the physical data on which any restrictive legislation must have been based. Her Majesty's Government are fully sensible of the importance of this question, and of the great value which will attach to an international agreement in respect to it; and Her Majesty's Representative will be furnished with the requisite instructions in case the Secretary of State should be willing to enter upon the discussion. You will read this despatch and my previous despatch of the same date to tht Secretary of State, and if he should desire it you are authorized to give him copies of them. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 230. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes. Sir, Foreign Office, October 3, 1889. I HAVE received your despatch of the 17th ultimo, and I bave to inform you that I approve the terms of your letter to Mr Blaine, inquiring when a reply might be expected to the request of Her Majesty's Government that instructions might be sent to the Alaska authorities to prevent thea possibility of further seizures of British sealing- vessels in Behring's Sea. 1 am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 231. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 5.) Sir, Downing Street, October 5, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a letter from Mr. T. U. Clarke, inclosing a Report of a meeting at Vicforia, British Columbia, held to protest against the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea, and adverting to the case of the " Juanita." Lord Knutsford would be glad to be informed what answer Lord Salisbury wishes to be returned to Mr. Clarke. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 231. Mr. Clarke to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Highgate House, Kilsby, Rugby, September 24, 1889. I BEG to call your attention to the Report of a meeting headed "A Vigorous Protest," in inclosed Victorian (British Columbia) paper, referring to the seizure of British sealing-vessels in the high seas. Also to the notice, marked on p. 4, referring to the robbery of 620 sealskins from the " Juanita," of which vessel my brother is captain and part-owner. As the vessel was 80 miles from land at the time of the seizure, I, on my brother's behalf, beg respectfully to ask whether Her Majesty's Government is taking steps to prevent these illegal seizures, and also to obtain compensation for those who suffer thereby. Your kind attention and advice will oblige. Yours, &c. (Signed) T. U. CLARKE. 317 Inclosure 2 in No. 231. Extracts from the | Victoria Daily Colonist" of September 1, 1889. A Vigorous Protest.—A few evenings ago, a meeting was held at the office of Messrs. Hall and Goepel of those interested in the sealing industr}', and a Committee of five was appointed to make arrapgements for a public meeting at which the voice of the people of Victoria could be heard in reference to the recent seizure of British schooners sealing in Behring's Sea. The Committee consulted with Mayor Grant, and a mass meeting was duly advertised to be held at the City Hall last evening for the purpose referred to. By 8 o'clock, at which hour the meeting was called for, every seat in the City Hall was taken, and dozens of deeply-interested citizens were compelled to stand. The meeting was thoroughly representative, there being present all the leading business men of Victoria, vessel owners and practical sealing men, while among the most prominent men present were to be noticed the Honourable John Robson, E. Crow Baker, M.P., Lieutenant-Colonel E. G. Prior, M.P., the Honourable Robert Beaven, M.P.P., D. W. Higgins, M.P.P., S. Duck, M.P.P., Mayor Grant, Robert Ward, President of British Columbia Board of Trade, Captain J. D. Warren, E. B. Marvin, W. Munsie, J. H. Todd, Morris Moss, C. Strouss, Captain William Grant, Captain Clarke, R. P. Rithet, and very many others. Upon motion of the Honourable Mr. Beaven, seconded by Mr. E. Crow Baker, M.P., Mayor Grant was requested to take the chair, which he did at 8*15 p.m. His Worship, in opening the meeting, said that the matters for the discussion of which the meeting was called had always possessed a deep interest for him. In the early part of 1887, he had had the honour to move in the House for the submission to the Dominion Government of a proposition for submission to the Imperial Government in regard to the protection of British sealing interests in Behring's Sea. His motion had been carried without a dissenting voice, in 18S8 he had made another proposition through the House. This proposition provided that the individual interests should not be allowed to suffer by the negligence of the Government in settling this question. He had always been very anxious to see an early settlement of the Behring's Sea question. Without further preface, he would call on Mr. Edgar Crow Baker, M.P. Mr. Baker expressed pleasure at being called on to strike the first blow. It was a a matter, be said, that concerned not only the individual, but the eniire province, the dominion at large, and the whole British Empire. The matter was one deserving of consideration, not only because it touched the individual pockets and the province our home, but because it touched our hearts. The view taken by the people of British , Columbia was that the grand old flag that they had learned to love from infancy had not only been insulted, but had been trampled in the dust. (Applause.) It was proposed to place everything in connection with the Behring's Sea question before the meeting truly and fairly from the very start, and to let the citizens of Victoria express their calm and conscientious opinion upon them. After referring but briefly to the various Treaties that had been made by the United States and Canada, which were not, however, entered into at any great length, as they affected more particularly the fisheries on the Atlantic seaboard, Mr. Baker pointed out how, as far back as 1S20, when Russia owned Alaska, and claimed jurisdiction not only over tbe 3-mile limit about its coasts, but also over the sea 100 miles from land, the United States' Secretary made a very vigorous protest at St. Petersburgh against the contention of the Russian Government. The British Government also strongly disputed Russia's claim, and the result was that in 1824 a Treaty was made with the Cnited States, and in 1825 one with Great Britain, which showed how the two great nations, Great Britain and the United States, joined issue with Russia when she set up the claim to jurisdiction over Behring's Sea, and contended that it was an inland sea, and not a branch of the Northern Pacific Ocean. On the 20th June, 1867, the United States purchased the territory of Alaska and the eastern half of Behring's Sea from Russia, paying therefor the sum of 7,200,000 dollars. At this time, the Russian Government gave them what they claimed to be a clear title to the eastern half of Behring's Sea. If that title was bad the fault is not ours. (Applause.) In 1870 the United States' Congress passed a measure prohibiting the killing of seals in close proximity to the Islands of St. George and St. Paul. Shortly after this, the United States' Government leased to the Alaska Commercial Company the exclusive right to kill seals for twenty years, in consideration of the sum of 55,000 dollars par annum, and certain royalties. In the early part of 1889 an Act was passed, by some claimed to have been smuggled through Congress in a rush, proclaiming not very definitely that intrusions in Behring's Sea would not be allowed; and containing a sweeping clause granting the President power to 318 deal with matters in connection with sealing by proclamation. Power of a very indefinite kind was also given in regard to giving instructions to the United States' cutters. Aggressive measures were first taken in 1886, when Mr. T. Lubbe wrote to him (Mr. Baker) at Ottawa, informing him that the British interests were endangered. Mr. Lubbe's letter was laid before the Governor-General in Council, and the matter was promptly placed before the Imperial Government by the Dominion Cabinet. The Minister of Justice at this time gave his opinion in favour of the British Columbian sealers both to Mr. Baker and to the Imperial Government, pronouncing the action of the United States illegal, and urging upon the British Government the necessity of taking definite action at once to protect her interests in British Columbia. This was three years and a-half ago, and it was most mortifying to think that this time should have elapsed before any decision was reached. The actual seizures commenced in 1886, when three schooners were taken possession of, along with their fittings and cargoes, and sold. The crews were cast on their own resources in Alaska, and the masters and mates were not only heavily fined, but imprisoned as well. Matters of losses were expected by every one in business; but every British Columbian felt that he was protected by the flag of England, under which many present were born, and thought it strange that he was not sheltered by the flag whose protection he had a right to expect. In 1887 nothing practical was done, and no restitution was made In 1887 the number of seizures was doubled, six schooners being taken possession of. Coming to the present, in 1888 no seizures were made, and there was every reason to believe that the seizures would be discontinued. The Dominion Government had acted as promptly and as energetically as they possibly could. They had placed all matters promptly and rightly before the Imperial Government. It was therefore easy to see where the responsibility rested. It was impossible for the Government of Canada to protect its citizens outside of the coast limit of a marine league. When the citizens of British Columbia sailed for the northern seas they passed beyond the protection of the Federal Government, fondly hoping that wherever they went they were protected by the old flag of England. Mr. Baker proceeded to read an amount of correspondence in reference to the appeal for protection made by Mr. Morris Moss for the British Columbia sealers on i8th March, 1888, which the Minister of Justice replied to by saying that it was to Great Britain to whom the sealers should look for protection. The Dominion Government could not send armed ships on the high seas to protect Canadians. On the 28th July of this year the schooner "Triumph" arrived in port, and her captain brought the news of his being boarded by Lieutenant Tuttle, of the United States' cutter " Richard Rush," and warned by him that if he was found in Behring's Sea fishing or hunting for seals, not only would his catch of seals be forfeited, but his vessel and equipments would be confiscated, and sent with a prize crew on board to an American port. The "Triumph" also brought news of the capture of the "Black Diamond." Immediately afterwards, on the following day, he (Mr. Baker) had telegraphed again to the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, asking him if it was not possible to secure some protection for the twenty other British sealers in Behring's Sea. The steamer " Sardonyx " was going north with coal for Her Majesty's war-ships, then in the north, in a few days, and it was suggested that instruction could be sent to them by the Imperial Government to protect the British sealers. An answer was received that the matter would receive immediate consideration. Having reviewed the whole history of the sealing question, Mr. Baker expressed the belief that all present could see for themselves how outrageous it was for any Government to arrogate to itself the exclusive control of a great body of water such as Behring's Sea was—700 miles long from north to south, and 900 miles wide. The desire of the sealers of Victoria was, first of all, to secure a guarantee that the seizures would be stopped. They had also a reasonable right to expect compensation for the losses already sustaiued, and without further delay. They, further, wished to be secured in their right to prosecute the deep-sea fishing, of which fur-sealing was a branch. He would conclude by moving the following Resolution:— " Whereas in the year 1886, by order of the Government of the United States, claiming exclusive territorial jurisdiction over the whole of Behring's Sea, eastward of a line drawn from about the middle of Behring's Strait south-westward till it crosses the 193rd meridian of longitude, three British vessels, while lawfully engaged in hunting seals, were seized in that sea at distances of from 65 to 70 miles from the nearest land ; and I Whereas after protest by the British Government against such seizures, the Government of the United States ordered the unconditional release of the said vessels; and' "Whereas by such a course the United States' Government practically admitted the illegality of the seizures, and left it to be inferred that no further seizures would be made; and imv^jzwr^^zf^rw^'™*"™-™™'™^™*™'**^™™™*"'.'™*-'™'-*-" 319 I Whereas in 1887 it again resorted to the seizure of sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea outside the 3-mile limit, and at distances from 15 to 92 miles from the nearest land, six vessels belonging to our citizens were seized by its orders and afterwards declared forfeited to the United States ; and " Whereas in the following year, 1888, sealing-vessels belonging to our citizens again entered Behring's Sea, and took seals throughout the season without molestation by the Rc-venue-cutters of the Government of the United States, which had distinctly that year, by its instructions to the commanders of its cutters in Behring's Sea, ordered that no seizures of such vessels be made; and I Whereas in the present year seizures of British sealing-vessels belonging to our citizens have again been made, practically in mid-ocean, in Behring's Sea, by order of the Government of the United States, the vessels robbed of sealskins on board, and arms and ammunition : I Be it therefore resolved, that the citizens of Victoria protest against the usurpation of jurisdiction by the Government of the United States over the waters of Behring's Sea, outside the universally acknowledged 3-mile limit, and express their indignation at the repeated outrages to which the persons and property of their fellow-citizens, lawfully exercising their rights on the high seas in that part of the globe, are subjected by the orders of tbe Government of the United States." Lieutenant-Colonel Prior, M.P., was called upon to second the Resolution. He was very glad, he said, to do so. He considered the conduct of the United States in the matter of seizing vessels on the high seas the most outrageous that could be thought of. There was no necessity for reviewir-g the question the present meeting was called to consider. It had been fully gone into already. The question was, what right had the American Government to seize our sealers ? A Voice from the audience.—No right. Colonel Prior, continuing.—That was just the answer I was going to make. The press of both countries says they had no right. The most important papers of the United States say that the American Government will have to back down in their contention. The Russian Government, by Treaties with both the United States ana Canada, gave up their claim to jurisdiction over Behring's Sea in 18^5. How then can the United States claim to have purchased their jurisdiction from Russia? The great majority of Americans acknowledge that the claim advanced by their Government has nothing to rest on. Who is to blame then for not stopping these illegal seizures ? The Dominion Government are not to blame. They have done all in their power. When the news of the first seizure this year reached me, I was in Kamloops. I at once telegraphed to Ottawa, and expressed the hope that the Imperial Government would give Admiral Heneage orders to retake the captured vessels. The "Caroline" had orders to do this in 1887, but for some reason was recalled. If in 1887, why not now ? If the Behring's Sea question is purely one of jurisdiction, why does not tl.e American Government allow its own sealers to fish and hunt unmolested? It is not the reason. The United States' Government is trying to bolster up a giant monopoly—the Alaska Commercial Company, who by tender acquired a lease of sealing rights on the Islands of St. George and St. Paul, the breeding-grounds, for twenty years. The true reason for their action is that the American Government is afraid to lose the 315,000 dollars paid them annually by the Alaska Commercial Company. Governor Swineford, of Alaska, has condemned the Company as the greatest and worst monopoly in America, but, as he says, it has its agents always at Washington to pull the strings in its interest. This is the last season of the Company's lease, and there is no knowing what the Government propose to do next. This year, when we first heard of the outrages in Behring's Sea, he bad thought, and he was not the only one on the floor of the House of Commons who had thought the same, that it would not be poor policy to send the British fleet into Behring's Sea to protect the interests of Canadians. If France set up a claim of jurisdiction over some particular part of the ocean, and seized a German sealer therein, do you think that it would have taken three years to settle the question ? Possibly, but they would be three very bad years for some one ! (Cheers.) If Beaconsfield had lived, would it have taken England three years and a-half to settle this question ? No! (Cheers.) He had pleasure in seconding the Resolution introduced by his colleague. The Resolution was carried unanimously, with cheers. The Honourable Mr. Beaven was the next speaker. He touched upon the various Treaties dealing with Behring's Sea, and referred to the manner in which British subjects were taught, that they were protected by the flag of England while and wherever they were engaged in a lawful calling. I he action of the United States was contrary to international law. It had been so pronounced by the Premier of England and a host of United States' mass 3?w 320 authorities. He thought matters should be at once referred to arbitration, as there could be no disputing the legality as well as the justice of the Canadian claim. It was true that Canada had suffered in past arbitration with the States; but still, arbitration was far preferable to any other method in the settlement of existing disputes. He proceeded to review the value of the sealing fleet and industry to the province, and explain the dimensions it might assume if the present difficulties were settled. From a dollar-and-cents point of view, it was necessary that action should be taken at once. He begged to move the following Resolution:— | Resolved,—That, as loyal British subjects, we resent the insult to our flag, and respectfully claim for our vessels and citizens on the high seas that protection by the British Government which for centuries has been the right and pride of even the meanest subject of the Empire, but which now seems to be denied us, causing great loss to the commerce of our city, and financial ruin to our fellow-citizens engaged in the sealing industry." Mr. S. Duck, M.P.P., seconded the Resolution. There should be no more delay. Some action should at once be taken to secure British subjects in pursuit of their lawful avocation from illegal seizure; and to let them know whether they are to receive compensation for loss already sustained while pursuing their legitimate calling on the high seas. It was hard for him to understand the apathy that had been shown by the Imperial Government in this matter. The good sense of the American people would compel their Government to take a right action in the matter, if the Imperial Government but did their duty by Canada. He was glad to second the Resolution. Again the Resolution was put and carried, with loud applause, but no dissenting voice. Mr. D. W. Higgins, M.P.P., was next called upon. He said that he had had placed in his hands the following Resolution, which he proceeded to read :— " Resolved,—That the time has come for a speedy and final settlement of the question of our rights in Behring's Sea, and we urge upon both the Imperial and Canadian Governments the danger of allowing this question to longer remain open." He thought this placed the question in a practical form. The other Resolutions were longer, but still explicit. He could not, he said, help contrasting the action of England when Imperial rights were concerned with her action in this case when Colonial interest was at stake. The Delagoa Bay incident came to his memory. Certain English property was seized by Portugal, and a cable-message was at once sent to England. Three days after a fleet was ordered to Delagoa Bay to protect the British interests. It would have been in keeping with this policy if the fleet at Esquimalt had long ago been sent to Behring's Sea to protect British interests. Beaconsfield, at the close of his carreer, said: " 1 have kept peace with honour." Can Salisbury, if the present policy is continued, sav the same at the close of his career ? He may say, " I have kept peace," but at the sacrifice of the liberties of the greatest and most warlike nation in the world. He (Mr. Higgins) had paid a visit to the Southern States, and witnessed all the awful desolation apparent just after the civil war. He had at that time breathed the prayer that his country might never know the horrors of war. War was awful; but there was one thing just as terrible—a peace preserved at the loss of national honour. (Loud cheers.) Mr. R. P. Rithet seconded Mr. Higgins' Resolution. He acknowledged that it was humiliating to be compelled to make an appeal for protection to our own nation while pursuing a lawful avocation on the high seas. The matter was of no moment whether tha insult had been offered to one humble subject or to many. The principle was the same. British subjects had been illegally made prisoners of on the high seas, and had been fined and imprisoned. Like good subjects, they had waited long for action to be taken without their demanding it as their right. This action not having been made, however, it was necessary now to emphasize the representations that had been made to the Imperial Government. Like Colonel Prior, he himself felt like striking back when he was hit. He thought it would have been a good thing if one of the British men-of-war lying idly in Esquimalt Harbour had sailed north for Behring's Sea with the " Richard Rush " at the beginning of the season ; kept in the " Rush's '' company until she attempted to interfere with some British sealer, and then quietly sail between and say, " You must not!" The United States now claimed that their desire was to protect the sealing industry from extermination. It was the desire of Victoria's sealers as well, and they would make no attempt to disobey any international regulations that might be made for the preservation of the seals. He was fully in accord with the Resolution, which he seconded. Like its two predecessors, the Resolution passed unanimously. Mr. Robert Ward, President of the British Columbia Board of Trade, drew attention to tbe inconsistency shown by the American Government, and carefully reviewed the 321 question of compensation before moving the following Resolution, which was seconded by Mr. J. H. Todd :— "Whereas no compensation has yet been made to the owners and crews of any of the vessels so seized and forfeited, be it therefore resolved, that we urge the Governments ot Canada and Great Britain to promptly compensate the sufferers by these seizures, irrespective of the merits of the international questions involved." Carried unanimously. The Mayor then called upon the Hon. Mr. Robson to move the next Resolution. Mr. Robson stepped forward amidst applause. He said the hour was so late, and so much had been said, and so well said, that he did not feel justified in occupying much of the time of the meeting. He was in perfect accord with the Resolutions which had been passed, and was hopeful of good results. That some such steps had not been taken sooner was matter of surprise and regret. Too long had the glorious old flag of which we all felt justly proud been trailed in the dust on these western seas with impunity (loud applause), and true loyalty required that we should employ every legitimate means to put a stop to it. Long enough had Brother Jonathan been allowed with impunity to twist the tail of the British lion, and now it remained for the "simple fishermen of Victoria" tc strike a lucifer under the lethargic old animal's nose, and arouse it to a proper sense of duty. (Applause.) One speaker had said the Provincial Government had nothing to do with this matter, while another said it had. Perhaps in the strict official sense it had not; but he conceived that in a very important sense it had to do with whatever concerned the welfare of the country, and he felt it to be due to the Provincial Government to say that this matter had received its most earnest attention. (Applause.) It had prepared and transmitted no fewer than sixteen Orders in Council and telegrams, and he could assure the meeting that these were couched in as strong language as was consistent with State documents. (Applause.) He moved the following Resolution :— "Resolved,—That copies of the Resolutions passed at this meeting be forwarded to the Imperial and Canadian Governments, and to all Boards of Trade in Canada." Mr: A. B. Gray seconded the Resolution, which he considered a fitting climax to the evening's work. It would show to the world the attitude the province of British Columbia had assumed after mature consideration of the question dealt with. The Resolution was carried, again unanimously; and after a vote of thanks to the Mayor, both for calling the meeting and for his services in the chair, the meeting adjourned. Another Returns.—Messrs. Hall and Goepel's little sealing schooner - Juanita,' Captain . Charles E. Clarke, which has been expected for several days, arrived safely yesterday afternoon, and tied up at Janion's wharf. Captain Clarke reports having sailed direct from Behring's Sea for home, but having been compelled to wait four days for a favourable wind to bring him in from the Straits. The I Juanita " was overhauled by the United States' cutter " Rush " on the 31st .July while sealing in Behring's Sea. She was boarded by the captain and lieutenant of the cutter with a boat's crew, who demanded Captain Clarke's papers, and also took possession of the entire catch of the schooner, 620 skins. The guns and ammunition carried by the schooner were safely hidden away, and the officers of the " Rush " failed to discover their whereabouts. Captain Clarke protested vigorously against the seizure, which, he informed the officers of the cutter, was outrageous, the schooner being 80 miles out in the open sea. They replied that they were sorry to be compelled to do it, but were forced to obey their orders. After instructing the captain to sail for Sitka, but without any American I prize crew," the "Rush" steamed away to capture another schooner sighted, and supposed.to be the "Lily." As soon as the cutter had dropped behind the horizon the "Juanita" resumed her hunting, but her luck had apparently- gone. After several days of hard weather the ''Juanita" sailed for home, passing the schooner "Kate" on the way down, but not close enough to speak her. [128] 2 T 322 No. 232. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, October 5, 1889. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 10th ultimo, inclosing a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, dated the 26th August last, in which his Excellency transmits copies of the instructions given to the special officer placed on board the "Black Diamond" by the officer commanding the United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush," and of a letter from the Collector of Customs at Victoria, together with affidavits of the masters of the "Black Diamond" and "Triumph." I am directed by his Lordship to state in reply, for the information of Lord Knutsford, that he has addressed to Her Majesty's Charge' d'Affaires at Washington the two despatches of which copies are inclosed.* They have been submitted to, and have received the concurrence of, the Law Officers of the Crown. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 233. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, October 13.) My Lord. Washington, October 12, 1889. I HAD the honour to receive on the 11th instant your Lordship's despatches of the 2nd instant on the subject of the seizures of British vessels in Behring's Sea. With the view of carrying out your Lordship's instructions to read the above despatches to the Secretary of State, leaving with him, should he desire it, copies thereof, I called yesterday at the Department of State, but was unable to find Mr. Blaine that. day. Accordingly, I called on him the next morning by appointment, read the two despatches to him, and left with him copies of the same. Wben I came to the passage in your Lordship's despatch which refers to the communication made by Mr. Bayard to Her Majesty's Government, unofficially, of an assurance that no further seizures of the character indicated should take place pending the discussion of the questions involved between the two Governments, Mr. Blaine stopped me and asked me if I could tell him in what manner this unofficial assurance had been given. I replied that I believed it to have been given in a letter from Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West, and that the letter would be found in the printed correspondence relative to the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea which was laid before Congress this year.f When I had concluded the reading of the despatches, Mr. Blaine asked me for copies of them, which I handed to him, and before I took my leave he said that he would send me a reply later on. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. No. 234. The Marquis of Salisbury to Mr. Edwardes.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, October 14, 1889. WITH reference to your telegram of the 12th instant, I have to observe that the assurance to which I alluded in my despatch of the 2nd instant was conveyed to me unofficiallv by Mr. Phelps on the 3rd April, 1888.| The conversation was recorded in a letter of the same date to the Colonial Office. There is also an allusion in a similar sense in a despatch from Sir L. West of the 6th April. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. * Nos. 228 and 229. t See Message from the President of the United States of February 12, 1889, p. 12; Mr. Bayard to Sir L, West, February 3, 1887. t See Nos. Ill and 120. Pin r irrrtnr—mnm^iffTffiTiniirrTir""-'—'■" 323 No. 235. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, October 15, 1889. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 5th instant, forwarding copy of a letter and inclosures from Mr. T. A. Clarke relative to the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea, with special mention of the case of the 1 Juanita," and asking what reply should, in Lord Salisbury's opinion, be returned to Mr. Clarke. I am directed by his Lordship to suggest that the answer should be to the effect that the question is at present under discussion between the two Governments, and that Sir J. Pauncefote, who is now on his way out, will at once enter upon the subject on his arrival at Washington. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. j No. 236. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 25.) Sir, Downing Street, October 24, 1889. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 5th instant, 1 am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, inclosing an approved Minute of his Privy Council, with copy of Resolutions passed at a meeting of the citizens of Victoria, British Columbia, on the 31st August last, respecting the seizure of British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea. Lord Knutsford proposes to reply to the Governor-General, with the concurrence of Lord Salisbury, in terms similar to those suggested as a reply to Mr. Clarke in your letter of the 15th instant. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure 1 in No. 236. Deputy Governor Sir W. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. ■ My Lord, Ottawa, September 19, 1889. I HAVE the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting a copy of the Resolutions passed at a meeting of the citizens of Victoria, British Columbia, on the 31st August, respecting the seizures of British sealing- vessels in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 2 in No. 236. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 14th September, 1889. ON a Report, dated the I lth September, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting a copy of the Resolutions passed at a meeting of the cirizens of Victoria, British Columbia, on the 31st August, having reference to the Behring's Sea seizures, the Committee, on the recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy thereof to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, for submission to Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted.- (Signed) JOHN J. McGEEi Clerk, Privy Council, P28] 2 T 2 SHBB team 324 Inclosure 3 in No. 236. Resolutions adopted at a Meeting of the Citizens of Victoria, British Columbia, held August 31, 1889. [See Inclosure 2 in No. 231.] No. 237. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 25.) Sir, Downing Street, October 24, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the consideration of the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of four despatches, with accompanying papers, received from the Governor-General of Canada, relating to tbe seizure, by the United States' Revenue- cutter " Rush " in the Behring's Sea, of the British sealing-vessels named in the margin.* I have, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure 1 in No. 237. Deputy Governor Sir W. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, September 20, 1889. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith, for your Lordship's information, a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting the affidavit of the owner and master of the British schooner " Minnie," who therein set forth the circumstances under which that vessel with her cargo of sealskins was seized in Behring's Sea on the 15th July last by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush." I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 2 in No. 237. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 14th September, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 12th September, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting the affidavit of the owner and master of the British schooner " Minnie," which vessel, with her cargo of 421 sealskins, was seized in the Behring's Sea on the 15th July last by the United States' Revenue-cutter "Rush;" the Committee recommend that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute, together with copy of the annexed affidavit, to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, for submission to Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) * JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 237. Affidavit of Victor Jacobson. I, VICTOR JACOBSON, owner and master of the British schooner "Minnie," o. Victoria, British Columbia, make oath and say :— I cleared my vessel from Victoria in the early part of May for a sealing voyage to Behring's Sea. My crew consisted of five white men and sixteen Indians. I entered the sea on the 27th June, and commenced sealing on. the 15th July. I was hove-to under reefed mainsail and jib", when I perceived a vessel under full steam bearing down upon us. * " Minnie," " Juanita," " Pathfinder," and "Lily." jgygfyrayfflAir^-^iRir^"^''""^ 325 This was about 3 p.m. I made sail and tried to get away, but was soon overhauled by what turned out to be the United States' cutter | Rush." Some one on board shouted out, " Heave-to." I did so, and a boat filled with men came alongside. A Lieutenant came on board and asked me for my papers, which I gave him. He then asked me how many seals I had. I replied about 450. He then took my papers off to the cutter, and returned and ordered his men to take off the hatches, and bring up all the skins they could find. They took off 421 skins to the cutter. I went on board the cutter and interviewed Captain Shepherd, who told me he must obey his orders, which were to seize every schooner found sealing in the Behring's Sea, and send them to Sitka. I returned to the schooner, when the Lieutenant asked me for my guns and spears. He took a breech- loading gun and a muzzle-loader, but refused a French musket which I offered him. He then left with his men, leaving one man on board. The cutter then steamed away. The Lieutenant told me before leaving that 1 was 65 miles south-east by east from Aonimak Pass. After the cutter left the United States' sailor told me he was in charge, but he never attempted to interfere with the working of the vessel. Some time afterwards he showed me his written instructions, which were that the vessel should proceed to Sitka, and there be handed over to United States' Marshal, and that the captain and mate should be arrested. I then concluded I would not go to Sitka, but would continue my voyage. That night we made some new spears, and next morning commenced hunting as though nothing had happened. We captured fifty seals that day and ninety on the next, kept on bunting until the 17th August, when, having five hundred seals on board, I leit for the south. After passing through Aonimak Pass, I told the prize crew I should steer for Victoria. He replied, " 1 always thought so." The Indians told me if the United States' sailor attempted to take the vessel to Sitka they would throw him overboard. We arrived in Victoria last evening, and to-day at noon the prize crew came ashore and reported at the American Consulate. (Signed) VICTOR JACOBSON. Sworn before me, at Victoria, British Columbia, 2nd day of September, a.d. 1889. (Signed) Robert Ward, A Justice of the Peace for the Province of British Columbia. Inclosure 4 in No. 237. Deputy Governor Sir W. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, September 21, 1889. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting the affidavit of the master and mate of the British schooner <£ Juanita," which vessel was seized on the 31st July last by the United States' Revenue- eutter | Rush," together with a copy of the receipt of the captain of the " Rush " for the^ ship's papers, and a sealed envelope addressed to the United States' District Attorney at Sitka. Your Lordship will observe that the seizure took place about 80 miles from the nearest land. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 5 in No. 237. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 14th September, 1889. ON a Report dated the 12th September, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting the affidavit of the master and mate of the British schooner p Juanita," which vessel, witn* her cargo of 620 sealskins, was seized in the Behring's Sea on the 31st July last by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush," together with the •original receipt of the captain of the "Rush" for the ship's papers, and u sealed envelope addressed to the United States' District Attorney at Sitka; and it will be observed that in this case the captain of .the " Rush " has fixed the latitude and longitude at which the seizure took place at 55° 42' north latitude and 17C° 40' west longitude, which is about IWWII»wJWIllMI«Bm«» 326 80 miles from the nearest land, and, as the captain of the " Juanita " defines it, "on the blue waters of the Great Ocean." The Committee recommend that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute, together with copy of the annexed papers, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for submission to Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, \§'St Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 6 in No. 237. Affidavit of the Master and Mate of the British Schooner " Juanita." WE, the undersigned master and mate of the British schooner "Juanita," hereby affirm and declare :— That the schooner " Juanita" entered the Behring's Sea on the 2nd day of July, 1889, having on board a crew consisting of four white men and fourteen Indians, all told, with seven canoes and one boat, the said schooner being engaged on a fur-sealing voyage. That on the 31st day of July, at about 3 a.m., the schooner being at that time in latitude 55° 30' north, longitude 170° 25' west, according to the master's reckoning, the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush " was discovered a short distance from the vessel. After some delay she (the "Richard Rush") steamed alongside the "Juanita," and the captain requested that the schooner be hove-to, as he wished to board her. In the course of- a very short time the schooner was boarded by three officers, the senior of whom inquired from the master with regard to the length of time the vessel had been in the sea, and the number of skins on board. On learning these particulars he (the officer) informed the master of the " Juanita " that he should have to seize his vessel and catch ; after which he instructed his boat's crew to tranship the sealskins (620 in number) to the " Richard Rush," which work was immediately proceeded with. The schooner's master remonstrated with the steamer's officer at the irregularity of this proceeding, pointing out the fact that the vessel was then something like 80 miles from the nearest land, and on the blue water of the Great Ocean, to which the officer replied that he was simply carrying out. the orders and instructions of his superiors. He then demanded the schooner's papers and the spears of the Indian hunters, which were given up. The papers consisted of the schooner's certificate of registration and her clearance. After all the skins had been transhipped, two letters were sent on board the schooner^ one (addressed to the master) proved to be a certificate of theseizuje^ and the other was addressed to the District Attorney of Alaska at Sijfcka. With these came verbal instructions to the master to proceed with his vessel to Sitka, after which the steamer-' went :on her way. During the time of these operations the Bsijtish ensign wasbflpog at the schoonejq'^g peak, nor was it hauled down until after the steamer had resumed her course. :*$S| (Sig«.ed) CHAS. E. CLARKE. Sworn before me thiseSnd day of September, 1889. (Signe'd) J. W. Shotbolt, Justice of the Peace. JOSEPH S$fiQR&;„ To whom THI Victoria, Statutes, cteafcatoce Inclosure 7 in No. 237. Certificate of Seizy,re. United States' Revenue-steamer "Rush," BehrMg's Sea, Lat. 55° 42' A7., Long. 170° 40' W., July 31, 1889. it may concern. S will certify that I have this day seized the British SGhooner."Jiuanjfcay?,'of British Columbia, C. E. Clarke, master, for violation of law, section 1968.JJfeRjgSpV United States, and'taken possession of his ship's papers, eonsislinJipQJ. registry and; (Signed) L. G. SBfiflftRD^Opttiw UHitedcStates' Ifeiv#iiue('M&fi?$e. iii'"**™ *""••"*-"*"*" J 327 Inclosure 8 in No. 237. Captain Shepard, U.S.N., to the United States' District Attorney. United States' Bevenue-steamer " Rush," Behring's Sea, Sir, Lat. '55° 29' N, Long. 166° 15' W, August 6, 1889. I HAVE the honour to inform you that 1 have this day in the Behring's Sea, latitude 55° 29' north, longitude 166° 15' west, seized the British schooner "Lily," of Victoria, British Columbia, John Reilly, master, for violation of law, section 1956 Revised Statutes. 1 have taken his arms and sealskins, 333 in number, on board the "Rush," for better security, and as I have no officer to spare to place in charge, I have directed the captain to proceed with his vessel to Sitka, Alaska, and on his arrival to set his crew, three white men and twenty-five Indians, at liberty, and to report in person to you; and I have to request that you will take charge of this vessel and her officers, Captain John Reilly and mate, George McDonald, until I can appear in the United States' District Court at Sitka against them. Very respectfully, (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD. Inclosure 9 in No. 237. Deputy Governor Sir W. Hitchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, September 23, 1889. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council of Canada, to which is appended a copy of the sworn statement of the master of the British schooner " Pathfinder," giving particulars of the seizure of his vessel by the United States' Revenue-cutter "Richard Rush," in Behring's Sea, on the 27th August last. The Canadian Government, as your Lordship will observe, call attention to the irritating and unjustifiable nature of the seizure, and request that suitable redress be demanded from the United States' Government for the wrong inflicted on loyal subjects of Her Majesty. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 10 in No. 237. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 14th September, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 7th September, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in connection with the Behring's Sea seizures, the swOrn statement of the master of the British schooner " Pathfinder," giving the particulars of the seizure of this vessel by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," in the Behring's Sea, on the 27th August last, and the removal thereto from the " Pathfinder" of 854 sealskins, together with all the rifles, shot-guns, and ammunition on board; the Minister submits also the instructions given the special officer placed on board the "Pathfinder" by the commander of the "Richard Rush," and it will be noticed, however, these were disregarded by the master and crew, as the vessel was navigated to Victoria, British Columbia, instead of Sitka. The Minister observes that, the circumstances which characterize this seizure are no less irritating and unjustifiable than those which have preceded it. The Committee recomtftsihd that your Excellency be moved to transmit a copy of this Minute, together with the papers herewith, to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, in order to bHtag to the notice of Her Majesty's Government the patflr&ilars of the seizure in question, with a view to seeking from the Government of the United States redress comtnensurate with the wrong which has in this ease been inflicted upon loyal subjects of Her Majesty. All which is respectfttlly submitted for your iBxctfllgrtcy's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. MoGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. 'BESS. 328 Inclosure 11 in No. 237. Statement of Captain O'Leary. ^pfel Victoria, British Columbia, August 30, 1889. CAPTAIN O'LEARY states that he sailed as master on board the British schooner "Pathfinder," owned by Carne and Munsie, of Victoria. We cleared at Custom-house on the 17th April for a sailing expedition to the North Pacific Ocean and on Behring's Sea. We had fair success, and shipped the early season's catch to Victoria. We entered Behring's Sea on the 1st July, and up to the 27th of that month had taken about 860 skins, the weather being rather unfavourable for sealing up to that time. On the morning of the 29th we sighted the United States' cutter "Richard Rush" in about 57° 24' north latitude,- 172° 14' west longitude. Commander Shepard ordered me to heave-to; I did so: as there was no wind, escape was impossible. First Lieutenant Tuttle came on board with a boat's crew, and asked me if I was sealing; I told him I was.. He asked me how many skins 1 had on board; I told him I had about 854. He then returned to the Revenue-cutter, and in a short time returned and told me he was going to seize my vessel. I asked him what he was going to seize me for; he said for sealing in Behring's Sea. His men then searched my vessel, and took all the ship's papers, 854 sealskins, 12 rifles and shot-guns, also all shells, cartridges, &c., which were transferred to the cutter "Rush." He put one of his crew on board my vessel, and told me to proceed to Sitka with the "Pathfinder." The "Rush" then steamed away, and I headed the "Pathfinder" south. After we were well out of the Behring's Sea, some of my crew informed the American officer that we were bound for Victoria. He said nothing to me, nor did he offer any objection. As the month of August is our best sealing month,. 1 consider we could easilv have taken 3,000 seals in all to the end of the sealing season. (Signed) W. O'LEARY. Sworn before me this 31st day of August, 1889. (Signed) J. VV. Shotbolt, Justice of the Peace. Inclosure 12 in No. 2^7. Captain Shepard, U.S.N., to Mr. Hunter. United States' Revenue-cutter" Rush," Behring's Sea, Sir, Lat. 57° 24' N, Long. 171° 55' W., July 29, 1889. YOU are hereby appointed a special officer, and are directed to proceed on board the- schooner " Pathfinder," of Victoria, British Columbia, this day seized for violation of section 1956 Revised Statutes of the United States, and assume charge of the said vessel, her officers and crew, twenty white men, all told; excepting the navigation of the vessel, which is reserved to Captain O'Leary, and which you will not interfere with unless you become convinced he is proceeding to some other than your port of destination, in which event vou are authorized to assume full charge of the vessel. Evervthing being in readiness, you will' direct Captain O'Leary to make the best of his way to Sitka, Alaska, and upon arrival at that port you will report in person to the United States' District Attorney for the District of Alaska, and deliver it to him, the letter so addressed, the- schooner, her outfit, and the persons of Captain William O'Leary and mate, A. Davidson, and set the crew7 at liberty. After being relieved of the property and persons intrusted to your care, you will, await at Sitka the arrival of the " Rush." Respectfully, &c. (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD. Inclosure 13 in No. 237. Deputy Governor Sir W. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, September 24, 1889. I HAVE the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting a copy of the affidavit of the master of the British sealing-schooner' I Lily," which vessel was seized in Behring's Sea by the United States' Revenue-cutter-' B Richard Rush" on the 6th;ultimo, about 60 miles, from the nearest land, together with a copy of the certificate of seizure signed by the captain of the " Richard Rush," and a, sealed communication addressed to the United States' District Attorney at Sitka. ;fe$K . . ' I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. JSjSjgTrasraEraira; ssa ■""™ 329 Inclosure 14 in No. 237. Meport of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the 18th September, 1889. ON a Memorandum, dated the 18th September, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting the affidavit of the master of the British sealing-scboonet "Lily," which vessel was on the 6th day of August last in the Behring's Sea (latitude 55° 29' northj longitude 166° 15' west), distant about 60 miles from the nearest land, with her cargo of 333 sealskins, seized by the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," also the certificate of seizure signed by L. G. Shepard, captain of the "Richard Rush," and a sealed communication addressed to the United States' District Attorney, District of Alaska, Sitka, given to the master of the " Lily " for delivery on his arrival at Sitka, whither he was ordered to proceed, which order, however, he disregarded, and sailed to Victoria. The Committee advise that your Excellency be pleased to forward copies of the inclosures to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, for submission to Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted for approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 15 in No. '237. Declaration of John Reilly. In the matter of the seizure of the sealing schooner "Lily" by the United States"' Revenue-cutter "Richard Rush," on the 6th day of August, a.d. 1889. I, JOHN REILLY, of the city of Victoria, British Columbia, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare that: I am a master mariner, and was at the time of the occurrences hereinafter mentioned, and still am, the master of the schooner " Lily," of the port of Victoria, British Columbia. On the 6th day of August, a.d. 1889, whilst I was on board and in command of the said schooner, and she then being on a sealing expedition, and being in latitude 55° 29' north and longitude 166° 15' west, and at a distance of about 66 miles from nearest land, the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush " overhauled the said schooner. I was first boarded by the First Lieutenant, who was armed, and who asked the bow many skins I had on board. I replied that he should find out himself, and said that if he wanted to see the schooner's papers I would show them to him, and would render him assistance should he want to search the schooner for contraband goods; but I would not acknowledge his right to seize me for sealing on the high seas. The First Lieutenant then returned to the cutter, and in a short time returned, accompanied by another boat of the cutter, which was in charge of the Second Lieutenant. They both came on board, and the First Lieutenant demanded of me the surrender of the schooner, and asking at the same time for the schooner's papers. This I at first declined to do, and the First Lieutenant said unless I gave the schooner's papers to him at once, he would take them by force. I then gave him the schooner's papers, consisting of registry, coasting licence, and clearance. The First Lieutenant then ordered both boats' crew to search the schooner, and they took from my schooner 333 sealskins, all in good order. He then asked hie if I would give him two sacks of salt. I told him that it would be useless for me to refuse, as he could take thenj by force, so I told him to go ahead and help himself. He then gave toe two letters, the contents of which were unknown to me at the time, one of them being sealed, and the contents of which is still unknown to me, the other certifying that he had seized the schooner "Lily" for violation of the United States' laws, and taken possession of the schooner's papers. He then told me to proceed to Sitka, Alaska. 1 asked him if he wanted me to go to Victoria or Sitka, Alaska; to which he replied that he had nothing to say, but had simply told me his orders. My crew at this time consisted of a mate, George McDonald, and three white men and twenty-five Indian hunters. The Indian hunters said they would not proceed to Sitka, and, to avoid further [128] 2 U ■Bsasasa 330 trouble, I directed the schooner's course for Victoria, and arrived here the 1st day of September, at 7 o'clock p.m. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of "The Oath Ordinance, 1869.' (Signed) JOHN REILLY. Declared at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, this 11th day of September, 1889, before me. (Signed) J. W. Shotbolt, Justice of the Peace. I hereby make oath that the above declaration is true as far as I know of. (Signed) GEORGE McDONALD. Declared at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, this 11th day of September, 1889, before me. (Signed) J. W. Shotbolt, Justice of the Peace. Inclosure 16 in No. 237. Certificate of Seizure. United States' Revenue-cutter "Rush," Behring's Sea, Lat. 55° 29' N, Long. 166° 15' W., August 6, 1889. To whom it may concern. THIS will certify that I have this day seized the British schooner | Lily," of Victoria, British Columbia, John Reilly, master, for violation of law (section 1956 Revised Statutes), and taken possession of his ship's papers, viz., certificate of registry, coasting licence, and clearance. (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD, Captain, United States' Revenue Marine'. No. 238. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received October 25.) (Extract.) Downing Street, October 24, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence respecting the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, inclosing an approved Minute of his Privy Council submitting a Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries on the subject. Inclosure 1 in No. 238. Deputy-Governor Sir W. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, September 23, 1889. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of the 18th ultimo, stating that Her Majesty's Government would be in a stronger position for dealing definitely with Behring's Sea cases if the appeals on 1886 seizures were pushed on, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting a Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries upon the subject. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 2 in No. 238. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on the \Qth September, 1889. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had under consideration a cable despatch, dated the 18th August, 1889, from Lord Knutsford, intimating that Her Majesty's 331 Government considers that it would be in a stronger position for dealing definitely with Behring's Sea cases if appeals in 1886 seizures were pushed on, and the despatch goes on to say : " It is very unusual to press for diplomatic redress for a private wrong as long as there is a reasonable chance of obtaining it from the Tribunals of the country." The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the cable despatch was referred, submits the annexed Report, in which tbe Committee concur. The Committee recommend that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy hereof and the annexed papers to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 238. Mr. Tupper to the Governor-General in Council. Ottawa, September 9, 1889. THE Undersigned has the honour to report that he has had before him a cable despatch from Lord Knutsford to your Excellency, dated the 18th August, 1S89. This despatch intimates that Her Majesty's Government considers that it would be in a stronger position for dealing definitely with Behring's Sea cases if appeals in 1886 seizures were pushed on. The despatch goes on to say : " It is very unusual to press for diplomatic redress for a private wrong as long as there is a reasonable chance of obtaining it from the Tribunals of the country." The Undersigned desires to call attention to some of the correspondence which has already taken place upon this subject. It will be recollected that in July 1887 Her .Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies, expressed the desire of the Marquis of Salisbury that before any further representations are made to the United States' Government with a view to obtaining reparation, that Her Majesty's Government should be in possession of the record of the judicial proceedings in the District Court in Alaska.* Copies of records in United States' District Court for the District of Alaska in the cases of "Onward," "Carolena," and "Thornton'' were duly forwarded in August 1887.f In acknowledging their receipt, the Marquis of Salisbury said : "I have further to request that you will endeavour to ascertain and report to me when it is probable that the appeals referred to in your despatches of the 2nd April, 1887, and of the 6th May, 1887, respectively, of the owners of the American ships which were seized on similar grounds, will come on for hearing, and whether any arrangement has been or can now in your opinion advantageously be made between the owners of the British and American vessels on the one side and the Government of the United States on the other, that one of these cases should be regarded as a test case, by which, in so far as the American legal Tribunals are concerned, the remaining cases might be held to be concluded. " It must, however, be clearly understood that any such arrangement, if made, would only affect the legal remedies which were open to the masters and owners of these vessels in the American Courts, and would in no degree limit the right of Her Majesty's Government, after all such legal remedies were considered to be exhausted, to intervene through diplomatic channels and on international grounds on behalf of snch masters or owners." The suggestion, that the United States should agree to a test case for submission to the United States' Supreme Court, was never acted upon. The cases of the United States' vessels referred to in this despatch as having been seized under circumstances similar to those of the British vessels were discontinued by consent of Counsel representing both private owners and the United States' Government. No suit is, therefore, now pending before the Tribunals of the United States, with the exception of the case of the "W. P. Sayward," a British ship, as hereinafter explained. In January 1887, it appears the authorities in Washington directed tbe release of the | Onward," "Carolena," and "Thornton," the 1886 seizures referred to in the cable message under consideration. Upon this subject an extract from a letter, dated the 17th August, 1889, from Mr. A. L. Belyea, Attorney for the owners of the vessels above referred to, and addressed to them, is appended to this Report. J [128] * Sir H. Holland, July 14, 1887. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West, August 10, 1S87. X Appendix (A). 2 U 2 332 In the year 1888, the Canadian Government having inquired whether the vessels seized could be bonded without imposing on the owners the obligation to appeal, correspondence took place between the Britisb and the United States' authorities, and upon the 21st day of June a Confidential despatch was received by Lord Stanley from Lord Knutsford, inclosing a Memorandum, dated the 28th May, 1888, which Sir L. S. West had received. This Memorandum is as follows:— " Memorandum. "In the cases of the condemned Behring's Sea vessels and their cargoes, it appears that the Proctor for some (and possibly all) of the British sealers failed to take an appeal from the Decrees of Condemnation entered by the District Court at Sitka. Consequently, they have lost the benefit of the Attorney-General's Order permitting release of tbe property on bond pending decision of the appeals, and, as the Decrees have become final, have no other than a diplomatic remedy.'' It would, therefore, appear that Her Majesty's Government were advised in 1888 that no appeal could be taken in the matter of the seizures of 1886. One vessel only of all those seized in the different years was released upon a bond of security for costs of an appeal being given, viz., the " W. P. Sayward," the circumstances attending which transaction are explained in Appendix (B). The United States' Marshal at Sitka was directed to take the remaining schooners (at- that time in possession of the United States' authorities, viz., the " Grace," " Dolphin," " Anna Beck,'' and " Ada") to Buget Sound for immediate sale. The owners of the " Anna Beck," " Grace," and | Dolphin," seized in 1887, having been refnsed leave to appeal, permission was asked for bonding their vessels at appraised value, and to have the sale then about to take place postponed pending the settlement of the question. After representation had been accordingly made, Mr. Bayard informed Sir L. S. West that the Acting Attorney-General had directed the postponement of the sale, and had instructed the United States' Marshal to receive bonds in lieu of the vessel. Mr. Bayard subsequently inclosed, under cover to Sir L. S. West, letters from the United States' Marshal for the District of Alaska, in which he reported that the original appraisement of these vessels was excessive, and that the value had still further deteriorated in consequence of the climate of Alaska. For these reasons the owners of all these vessels, with the exception of the owners of the "Anna Beck,", refused to bond them at the old appraisement. The owner of the '• Anna Beck " alone was willing to give a bond at the original appraisement, subject to a final settlement of the matter without necessitating an appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States. Accordingly, the Government of Canada requested the British Government to move the United States' authorities to authorize the reappraisement in the cases of the "Grace" and "Dolphin," and to sauction the bonding of the "Anna Beck" in the manner proposed. After much delay, it was intimated that the sale of these vessels would be proceeded with, and a reappraisement and bonding as above would not be sanctioned by the United States' authorities. From the correspondence herein reviewed, it will thus be seen that the only appeal in the Canadian case from the Judgment of the Court of First Instance which has been preferred is in the case of the " W. P. Sayward," seized in 1887. This case has been duly inscribed in the Supreme Court of the United States for nearly a year, and, on inquiry, the Undersigned learns that it will not be reached in its turn for argument for another year from this date. It further appears that the suits regarding the United States' vessels seized under similar circumstances b^ve been discontinued ; that no test case was ever agreed upon ; and that the United States' Government w mid not sanction the release and bonding of the seized vessels pending a settlement of the question. The owners of the " W. P. Sayward " having to await the almost endless delays attending the arguments and decision of a case in the Supreme Court of the United States, the question whether an appeal lies in such a case being also involved, and the administration of that country evincing no desire to reach an early decision in their Appellate Court upon the question at issue, the Undersigned hopes that Her Majesty's Government will not consider that the just demands of the Canadian Government should not be pressed until the case of the " W. P. Sayward " is disposed of. The decision of the Court in the District of Alaska in the case of the " Dolphin," a case similar to all of the rest, proceeded upon the one ground, viz., that Behring's Sea was 333 ceded to the United States by Russia, and that the title in Russia at that time was exclusive.* It will be observed that none of the seizures in Bebring's Sea forming the subject of correspondence between Her Majesty's Government and thar, of the United States involve the investigation of complicated facts. There is no pretension that any vessel seized was within the 3-mile or territorial limit. The sole question is the claim of the t)pited States to the exclusive control over that part of the North Pacific Ocean known as the Behring's Sea. Tne Undersigned submits that the fact that Russia once raised the same point does not establish on the part of the United States even a primd facie case, especially in view of the attitude of the latter country when such a claim was put forward by Russia. So long ago as July 1888, the views of the Canadian Government regarding the propriety of owners of seized vessels assuming the obligation and responsibility of appealing from the decision of the District Court of Alaska were communicated to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Report of that date dealt with a despatch of the 9th March, 1888, from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, relative to the then pending proceedings in the cases of the Canadian sealers seized in Behring's Sea. The Committee deemed the obligation sought to be imposed upon the pwners of Canadian vessels seized in the Behring's Sea of appealing from the decision of the Magistrate at Sitka was " obviously one which cannot with justice or propriety be enforced." The Report went on to say that " some doubts exist as to the right of appeal; and if it should he held that no appeal will be, the bonds will be forfeited. Apart from this risk, however, which the owners of the vessels are asked to take upon themselves, it appears that the giving of bonds of such a nature would involve the admission that the Courts of the United States had jurisdiction in regard to the seizures, and that the Laws of the United States applied in the cases of these vessels. Such propositions could by no means be admitted. The vessels had not entered within the waters over which the Laws of the United States extend, and over which the Executive or Judiciary of that country have any authority. "The vessels in question were molested in their lawful occupation on t\)e high seas, and were seized by vessels in the service of the United States, but possessing no right whatever to molest the people of Canada or their property on the ocean. "Similar outrages have been committed in the preceding year, and the vessels seized then were ordered to be surrendered by the United States' authorities. In the present cases, therefore, the repetition of such acts of violence was a proceeding for which the owners of the vessels have the right to expect that Her Majesty's Government will demand and exact redress. They should not be asked to seek that redress in the Courts of any foreign country whatever: the Courts of the United States have no more cognizance of their complaint than the Court of any other foreign country." The Undersigned is not aware that Her Majesty's Government at any time previous to the cable message now under consideration intimated that the above ground was not well taken. On the contrary, previous to the receipt of this cable message the particulars of every seizure had been furnished by the Canadian Government to Her Majesty's Government, the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown had been obtained by Her Majesty's Government, advising that the claims could be pressed, and the Marquis of Salisbury had in a despatch of the 10th September, 1887, to Sir L. S. West, dealt fully with the claim set up by the Administration of the United States in connection with these seizures, in which he stated: '; Her Majesty's Government have carefully considered the transcript record of the Judicial proceedings in the United States' District Court in the several cases of the schooners 'Carolena,' 'Onward,' and 'Thornton,' which were communicated to you in July, and were transmitted to me in your despatch of the 12th of that month, and they cannot find in them any justification for the condemnation of these vessels." It is to be remembered that these arc the seizures of 1886, to which the cable message has special reference. The following vessels, while pursuing their lawful occupation in the North Pacific Ocean, have been wantonly seized and molested by Revenue-cutters of the United States: "Carolena," 2nd August, 1886; "Onward,"2nd August, 1886; "Thornton," 2nd August, 1886; " W. P. Savward," 9th July, 1887; "Dolphin," 12th July, 1887; "Anna Beck," 2nd Julv, 18S7; ""Grace," 17th" July, 1887; "Ada," 20th August, 1887; "Alfred Adams," 6th August, 1887 (escaped); "Black Diamond," 11th July, 1889 (escaped); "Pathfinder," 27th August, 1889; "Minnie," 15th July, 1889; besides the "Favorite," * See Report, Governor of Alaska, 1887. 334 warned off under threat of seizure, 2nd August, 1886; and the "Triumph," searched 11th July, 1889. In every instance, as already stated, the Canadian Government has placed Her Majesty's Government promptly in possession of the information in its possession, and it is with much regret that, at this date, when the period for appealing has long since expired in the case of the seizures of 1886, the Undersigned learns that any further steps are considered necessary to strengthen the demand made in 1886 upon the United States' Government, more especially in view of similar outrages now being daily perpetrated. With deference, the Undersigned further submits that the intimation in the cable despatch above mentioned is somewhat unusual under the circumstances which attended the seizure of the ships in question. If the alleged infraction of the Laws of the United States had occurred in the waters over which that country is or was entitled to exercise jurisdiction, the Courts of the United States could with propriety be first resorted to before pressing any claim for the immediate attention of the Executive. In view of the firmness with which the rights of British subjects on the high seas haye been maintained in the past, the Undersigned fails to appreciate not merely any reason for the long delay in obtaining satisfaction from the aggressive and hostile action exercised against Britisb subjects and British property by the United States, but also for the wanton continuance of this treatment from which so much direct and indirect damage and loss is sustained by one of Her Majesty's Colonial Possessions. Moreover, the Undersigned would call attention to the imminent danger of loss of life, not to speak of the physical suffering already sustained, since it requires no argument to show that the lawless violence on the part of the Revenue-cutters of the United States' Government may at any time lead to forcible resistance from the crews of British vessels being pursued and molested in their lawful pursuits. The Undersigned, therefore, recommends that his Excellency the Governor-General be moved to acquaint the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies with these views, and to urge that no further time be permitted to elapse without securing for British subjects in Canada the same freedom in the navigation and enjoyment of the waters of the Behring's Sea Which the United States claimed for the seamen of all nations when the territory adjacent to that part of the Pacific Ocean belonged to the Empire of Russia. Respectfully submitted. (Signed) CHARLES H. TUPPER, Minister of Marine and Fisheries. Appendix (A). Re Behring's Sea Seizures. To Captain John G. Cox and William Munsie, Esq., Victoria, British Columbia. Gentlemen, Victoria, August 17, 1889. In reference to the orders issued by the United States' Government for the release of the'British schooners "Carolena," "Onward," and-" Thornton," seized in Behring's Sea in 1886, and since detained at Ounalaska, I received in August last from the United States' Marshal, Atkins, of Alaska, the following letters :— "A. L. Belyea, Esq., Victoria. " District of Alaska, Office of United Stales' Marshal, " Dear Sir, " Sitka, August 4, 1888. "In reply to your letter of the 17th July, I have the honour to state that in the month of February 1887 the officers of the District Court of this district received a despatch purporting to be from the United States' Attorney-General, directing the release of the schooners ' Onward,' ' Thornton/ and ' Carolena,' but, on what was then deemed sufficient evidence, the despatch was thought to be a forgery, and no action was taken in the matter until the receipt in October last of another despatch from the Honourable Attorney-General, as follows :— " 'Let the vessels " Carolena," " Onward," and "Thornton" be released, as ordered in mine of the 6th January last." " On the receipt of the above despatch I gave notice thereof to Captain J. D. Warren 335 and to Mr. C. Spring, of Victoria, owners of two of the vessels, and should have given like notice to the owner of the ' Carolena' had I known his address and name. I requested Captain Warren to notify all owners at Victoria, and Mr. Spring published the notice I gave him in the Victoria papers. This I deemed sufficient notice to all the parties concerned. I have not received any order from Washington other than above mentioned. " Very respectfully, (Signed) " Barton Atkins, " United States' Marshal," The following copy of the despatch referred to in Marshal Atkins' letter, and of the order made thereon by Judge Dawson, of the United States' District Court, Alaska, I obtained shortly afterwards from the official records at Sitka : — § To Judge La Fayette Dawson and M. D. Ball, " United States' District Attorney, Sitka, Alaska. " Washington, January 26, 1887. "I am directed by the President to instruct you to discontinue any further proceedings in the matter of the seizure of the British vessels 'Carolena,' 'Onward,' and I Thornton,' and discharge all vessels now held under such seizure, and release all persons that may be under arrest in connection therewith. (Signed) "A. H. Garland, Attorney-General." | Copy of Order. " To Barton Atkins, United States' Marshal for " District of Alaska. "You 'Thornton, are hereby directed to release the vessels ' Carolena,' ' Onward,' and and l San Diego,' which were seized in Behring's Sea for violation of .section 1956 United States' Statutes, together with their tackle, apparel, skins, guns, ammunition, small boats, and everything pertaining to said vessels. "This 10th day of February, 1887. (Signed) " La Fayette Dawson, District Judge, " District of Alaska." About the time I received the above letter I met the Marshal in this city, and asked him why no official notice of the release of these schooners had been given to the owners. In reply, he said he thought it had been done, but if not he would attend to the matter on his return to Sitka. Such notice not coming to hand as expected, I, on the 16th October following, wrote the Marshal as follows:— i Barton Atkins, Esq., United States' Marshal, " Sitka, Alaska. I My dear Sir, " Victoria, British Colombia, October 16, 1888. I You may remember a conversation I had with you when in Victoria in reference to the non-receipt of official notice of the release of the schooner ' Carolena ' at Ounalaska by her owners. At their request I have to ask that you will kindly forward the same to me by return mail. The owners, as you may notice on referring to the records of the Court, are Munsie and Co. (Munsie and Co.) of this city. " I am, &c. (Signed) "A. L. BelyeA, " Attorney for Munsie and Co." By return mail I received from the Marshal a letter, saying that official notice had -been sent to the owners of the "Carolena," with ah order directing the Deputy Collector at Ounalaska to deliver the vessel to the owners, which notice and order are to be found on pp. 7 and 8 of Mr. Milne's statement. Thus it was that not till nearly two years arter "the Washington authorities ordered the release of this vessel, and then only after asking for it was such notice received; and to this day the owners of the " Thornton" and "Onward" have received no such official notice or order for delivery, and could not, if they so desired, obtain possession of their vessels. The telegram ordering the release was received at Sitka on the 9th February, 1888. The vessels were then under order for sale, which order Judsre Dawson immediately 336 revoked, and on the 19th of same month made the order for the release above recited. This order was given to the Marshal, but for the reasons apparently mentioned in the Marshal's letter to me of the 4th August, 1888, the matter dropped. The officials at Sitka took no steps to find out whether the telegram was genuine or not, nor did they, so far as I can learn, ever acknowledge or notify the Washington authorities of its receipt. This shuffling on the part of the Court Secretary calls " some misconception and mistake," but those who know and have felt the power of the Alaska Commercial Company in Alaska call it a vastly different name. Appendix (B). Extract of a Letter from Mr. A. L. Belyea to the Deputy Minister of Fisheries, May 23, 1888. "The [the owner] had gone to Sitka to secure, if possible, the release of all the schooners seized in 1887, viz., the " Grace," " Dolphin," " Anna Beck," " W. P. Sayward, ' and " Ada." The bond on release was conditioned on prosecuting an appeal from the Alaska District Court to the Supreme Court of the United States. The formal motion thus became one for leave to perfect an appeal, and such motion for each of the vessels was made on the 14th April last before Judge Dawson at Sitka, and in every case refused, on the grounds that the time for allowing an appeal had expired. Captain Warner's Counsel then applied for a record of the order refusing leave to appeal. This was on Saturday. On Monday following, April the 16th, without any application therefor by the defendant or any one on his behalf. Judge Dawson offered to rescind the order of Saturday in the case of the "W. P. Sayward," and release her to the owners. She was then lying at Puget Sound, under an order for sale on that day. The offer was accepted (contrary; as Captain Warren says, to the expectation of the United States' authorities at Sitka), and the order of the previous Saturday rescinded, and leave granted to appeal. I am not informed as to the amount of the bond." Appendix (B 2). [This is identic with Appendix (A) from Mr. Atkins' letter of August 4, 1888, to the end.] No. 239. Mr, Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 28.) My Lord, Washington, October 9,1889. WITH reference to the question of appeals filed in the Supreme Court by owners of sealers in Behring's Sea, of which up to now it has been believed that there were none but the case of the "lW. P. Sayward' v. the United States," I have the honour to inclose a copy of a Memorandum which I have received from Mr. Calderon Carlisle on the subject-of an appeal, viz., " The schooner ' Sylvia Handy * v. the United States," which, it appearSj had escaped the notice of even the Clerk of the Court, in spite of the many applications which have of laie, under the direction of Her Majesty's Legation, been made. I shall not fail to secure copies of the record, should it be printed. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. 337: Inclosure in No. 239. Memorandum as to the Case of the Schooner (October Term: Sylvia Handy" 1889, No. 683.) v. the United States.- THE Clerk of the Supreme Court telephoned me yesterday that he had discovered the above appear on the docket of the Court, of which he knew nothing on my last visit there. The record, which I have examined, is practically the same as that in the case of the "Sayward." It seems to have been filed on the 16th June, 1888. Mr. McKenna, Member of Congress from California, entered his appearance to secure the filing of the record, but the real Counsel in the case is Mr. Howell L. Powell, 207, Sansome Street, San Francisco, California. The Clerk's attention was called to this case by the visit of local Counsel yesterday, to learn the expense of printing tbe record in the case. There is included in the record a brief for claimants, which discusses the pretensions of Russia in Behring's Sea. The schooner's cargo consisted of 1,679 skins, and the schooner and her cargo were appraised at 12,673-25 dollars. The schooner is described as of San Francisco, appears to be registered in the United States ; and there is a certificate of deposit of some of her papers with the United States' Consul at Victoria, British Columbia. The capture was made 17 miles from Cape Cheerful in 54° 12' north, 166° 50' west. The vessel was captured on the 2nd September, 1887, with forty-twd unskinned seals on deck. (Signed) C. CARLISLE. Washington, October 1, 1889. No. 240. Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received October 28.) My Lord, Washington, October 15, 1889. I HAD the honour to receive your Lordship's telegram of the 14th instant, in which, with reference to my despatch of the 12th instant, you informed me that the unofficial assurance given to Her Majesty's Government by Mr. Bayard that no further seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea should take place pending the discussion of the points at issue between Her Majesty's Government and that of the United States, which was referred to in your Lordship's despatch of the 2nd October, was the assurance which was given unofficially by the United States' Minister in London and also by Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West in the month of April last year. With the view of removing any misconception on the part of Mr. Blaine owing to the reply I had given to his inquiry when reading your Lordship's above-mentioned despatch to him, that I believed the assurance referred to was given by Mr. Bayard in a letter addressed to Sir L. West, and that the letter would be found in the printed correspondence on the subject which was laid before Congress this year, I wrote to Mr. Blaine a letter, a copy of which I have the honour to inclose, in accordance with the information with which your Lordship did me the honour to furnish me in your telegram above referred to. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. Inclosure in No. 240. Mr. Edwardes to Mr. Blaine. My dear Mr. Blaine, Washington, October 14, 1889. WHEN I had the honour to read to you on Saturday, the 12th instant, two despatches addressed to me by the Marquis of Salisbury on the subject of the seizures of British sealers in Behring's Sea, you inquired of me, when I reached the passage which runs as follows : " Mr. Bayard did, indeed, communicate to us, unofficially, an assurance that no further seizures of this character should take place pending the discussion of the [128J 2 X 1 338 questions involved between the two Governments^' if I could tell you in what way this assurance was unofficially communicated to Her Majesty's Government. I replied that. I believed it had been so communicated in a letter addressed by Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West, and that that letter would be found in the printed correspondence on the subject laid before Congress this year. I have since learnt that the assurance which Lord Salisbury had in mind when writing the despatch I read was not that to which I referred in my reply to you, but was an assurance communicated unofficially to his Lordship by the United States' Minister in London and also by Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West in the month of April last year. I have, &c. (Signed) H. G. EDWARDES. No. 241. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, November 2, 1889. I HAVE laid before the Marquis of Salisbury Mr. Meade's three letters of the 24th ultimo, with their inclosures, relating to the question of the seizures of British sealing-vessels by the authorities of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea. In reply, I am directed by his Lordship to request that you will state to Lord Knutsford that copies of all these papers will be forwarded at once to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington. I am to suggest that the Governor-General of Canada should be informed that Sir Julian Pauncefote, before leaving for his post, was instructed to take the earliest opportunity of discussing the question with Mr. Blaine. Lord Salisbury proposes to await Sir Julian's Report before deciding as to what further steps should be taken in the matter. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 242. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, November 5, 1889. I HAVE received Mr. Edwardes' despatch of the 15th ultimo, forwarding copy of the private letter which he addressed to Mr. Blaine respecting the unofficial assurance given to Her Majesty's Government that no further seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea should take place pending the discussion of the points at issue between the two Governments. I have to inform you that Mr. Edwardes' action in this matter is approved by Her Majesty's Government. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 243. Sir C. Lampson and Co', to Foreign Office.—(Received November 7.) Dear Sir, 64, Queen Street, London, November 6, 1889. WE addressed Lord Iddesleigh on the 12th November, 1886, on the subject of the Behring's Sea seal fishery. Since that time the number of sealing-vessels, mostly owned in British Columbia, has steadily increased, and this year, owing to the high prices obtainable for the skins, as many as fifty schooners, some of them fitted with steam, and amply provided with firearms, have been engaged in the capture of female seals. 339 njjt is estimated thjatctfeir catch this season will amount to no less than 40,000 skins. This number does not include tbJe many animals killed or mutilated, but not retrieved. Now, if this indiscriminate slaughter of female seals cannot be stopped, or at all events restricted, by some International Agreement (as to a close time, for instance), the animal will, before many years are over, become extinct, and a large industry, in which Great Britain is deeply interested, will be lost. Already there are unmistakable signs that the number of seals annually visiting the two breeding islands in the Behring's Sea is decreasing, for from Reports lately to hand, we learn that the Superintendent on the islands, which are leased from the United States' Government by the Alaska Commercial Company of San Francisco, has this year found considerable difficulty in obtaining the usual quantity of desirable male seals, and estimates that the herd has decreased fully one-third in the last ten years. In submitting these facts to you, we would urge the importance of arriving at a sp^8ay settlement of this question before it is too late. ""vVe are &c. (Signed) \ C. M. LAMPSON and Co. ifcoi No. 244. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received November 8.) Sir, Downing Street, November 8, 1889- I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Deputy-Governor of Canada relating to the question of the Behring's Sea seizures, from which it appears that the High Commissioner for Canada is to be instructed to place himself in communication with Her Majesty's Government, with the object of expediting a satisfactory settlement of the general question. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 244. Sir W. J. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, October 23, 1889. I HAVE the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy iGoancil, having reference to the course which the owners of British schooners seized in Behririg's Sea by the United States' cutter " Rush " proposed to follow in the event of Captain Sheppard's arriving at Victoria. Your Lordship will note the recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, that the High Commissioner be instructed to place himself in personal communication with Her Majesty's Government, with the object of expediting a satisfactory settlement of the general question of.seizures in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE, Deputy-Governor. Inclosure 2 in No. 244. Report 'of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the \Sth Octooer, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 12th October, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, stating that the following telegram has been received from Messrs. Carnie and Munsie, of Victoria, British Columbia, on behalf of parties interested in the fur-seal fisheries of Behring's Sea:—« [128] 2X2 umv.iu.mmjJ.1. 340 "Cutter 'Rush' expected here. Owners of seized schooners think of holding Captain Sheppard to bail in action for damages. What do you advise?" To which the Minister replied as follows:— 1 Telegram yesterday received. Cannot advise under present circumstances, but I do not anticipate any beneficial result from such a course." The Minister submits that, while his reply discouraged the action contemplated by the parties interested, it is quite competent for any British subject to institute such proceedings under the Law of Canada. The Minister desires to refer to a newspaper cutting, herewith annexed, taken from the I Ottawa Citizen," purporting to be a report of a reply by Captain Sheppard, of the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush," to an inquiry whether he had any knowledge of the intention indicated in the above telegram. The Minister, with reference to the information supplied from time to time to the Imperial Government on the subject of the seizure of British vessels in the Behring's Sea, and to the great national importance of the earliest possible settlement of the question, owing not only to the continuation of the outrages during the past season by United States' Revenue-cutters, but to the growing doubt on the part of the Canadian people as to whether Her Majesty's Government will actively support the demands of the Dominion of Canada in consequence of the long delay which has taken place in arriving at a satisfactory adjustment of the question, recommends that the High Commissioner for Canada in London be directed to place himself in personal communication with Her Majesty's Government, with the object of expediting in any way he may be able to do a speedy and satisfactory settlement of the question. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and that a copy be also sent to the High Commissioner for Canada. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 244. Extract from the " Ottawa Citizen" of October 12, 18S9. Seattle, Washington, October 11, 1889. THE United States' Revenue-cutter " Rush " arrived here yesterday from Alaska. Lieutenant-Commander Sheppard was interviewed regarding rumours current here that British Columbians were lying in wait for him to punish him for seizing their schooners. The Commander smiled, and said he had not heard of any such threats until he had read them in the papers on his arrival at Fort Townsend. He said that he did not believe anything of the kind had been uttered, and the statement must have come from irresponsible persons. If there was any truth in it, and he could have been apprised of it in time, he would have steamed into Victoria, and have shaken the American flag in the face of the Victorians. He said he was on good terms personally with the prominent men in Victoria, and did not believe that any indignity to an American Government ship would be counr tenanced by the people of Victoria. No. 245." Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.— (Received November 11.) My Lord, Washington, October 31, 1889. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith copies of an article which has appeared in a San Francisco newspaper on the subject of the seizures in Behring's Sea, which maintains the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States in that sea. The article is written by Mr. Felton, one of the representatives for the State of California in Congress. An answer to this (copies inclosed) appeared in tbe New York "Evening Post," the 341 author of which is Mr. Robert Rayner, who has already written a very able letter on this subject. 1 have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 1 in No. 245. Extract from the "San Francisco Argonaut" of August 12, 1889. The Question oe Behring's Sea. (By Charles N. Felton.) [The annexed article, by the Honourable Charles N. Felton, Member of Congress, will be found of much interest, particularly at this time. Mr. Felton is thoroughly conversant with the subject, as he was a member of the Conference Committee between the Senate and the House which caused the passage of the Bill amendatory of the Laws regulating the fur-seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. This Bill was passed during the closing hours of the Cleveland Administration.—Eds.] IN view of the fact that the Government of the United States has seized the British schooner " Black Diamond," confiscated the vessel and cargo, as required by our Statutes, for evasion or infringement of our laws, and that our right to do so is questioned, and perhaps may become an international question, it occurs to me that a statement of the facts upon which is based our rights and title would not be uninteresting to your readers; hence, I will attempt to give them such a statement. The title of the United States to Alaska and the Behring's Sea was acquired from Russia by the Treaty of Cession made in 1868, in which she "ceded and conveyed all the rights, franchises, privileges now belonging to Russia in the ceded territory or dominion, and appurtenances thereto;" the same being contained within the geographical limits herein set forth, to wit:— " The eastern limit is the line of demarcation between the Russian and British possessions in North America, &c. The western limit, within which the territories and dominion conveyed are contained, pass through a point in Behring's Strait on the parallel of 65° 30' north latitude, at its intersection by the meridian which passes midway between the Island of Krusenstern or Ignalook and the Island of Ratmanov or Noonarbrook, and proceeds due north, without limitation, into the same frozen ocean. The same western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds thence in a course nearly south-west through Behring's Strait and Behring's Sea, so as to pass midway between the Island of Attoo and the Copper Island, of the Kormandorski couplet or group, in the North Pacific Ocean, to tbe meridian of 193° west longitude, so as to include the whole of the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian." Russia's title was based upon the following facts:— Behring's Sea, formerly called the Sea of Kamchatka, was discovered by Vitus Behring, a Russian subject and officer, in 1725. From that date to that of the purchase of Alaska by the United States, its waters were surrounded by Russian territory, except Behring's Strait upon the north, and the south-west outlet to the North Pacific Ocean. Soon after its discovery, it was occupied by Russian citizens as traders and fur-hunters, and several trading stations were established upon its coasts and islands by Russian subjects. In 1745, the Aleutian Islands were discovered by Russia. In 1768, Behring's Sea, the whole archipelago, and the Peninsula of Alaska, were explored by an expedition ordered by the Empress Catherine. Subsequently, Russia caused four other exploring expeditions to be made, in 1785, 1803, 1815, and 1826. Vancouver discovered the coast of British Columbia in 1790, and in the same year the Columbia River was entered by Gray. It will be here noted that Russia's discoveries and titles on the north-western coast antedate those of the other nations some sixty-five years. In 1764, the Russian Government granted the right to trade on the Aleutian Islands to a Russian Company, who created and conducted a considerable number of trading stations. In 1799, tbe then Russian Emperor Paul issued his Imperial Ukase, asserting the Dominion of Russia, by right of discovery and occupancy, to all the territory embraced JlgUAHMLUlllBlMllMMS!" 342 from Behring's Strait on the north to the 55th parallel on the American coast, and as far south as Japan on the coast of Asia; and invested the Russian-American Company with its absolute control, and, if necessary, the land and naval forces of the Empire were ordered to md&tain their jurisdiction. To this Imperial act no protest was made on the part of any of the nations, nor were Russia's rights disputed or questioned. Thus tacitly, at least, all the nations conceded her rigbts,"based first upon discovery, and next upon continued occupancy and peaceful and undisputed possession for nearly three-quarters of a century. In 1821, upon the complaint of this Company to the Russian Government that their rights under their Charter were being disturbed by the interference of foreigners, the then Emperor Alexander issued his Manifesto, extending his dominion to the 51st parallel on the North American coast, and prohibiting foreign? vessels from approaching within 100 miles of the shore. I quote from said Manifesto as follows :— " Section 1. The transaction of commerce, and the pursuit of whaling and fishing, or any other industry, on the islands, in the harbours and inlets, and, in general, all along the north-western coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st parallel of northern latitude, and likewise on the Aleutian Islands, and along the eastern coast of Siberia, and on the Kurile Islands—that is, from Behring's Strait to the southern promontory of the Island of Urup, viz.j as far south as latitude 45° 50' north—are exclusively reserved to subjects of the Russian Empire. " Sec. 2. Accordingly, no foreign vessel shall be allowed either to put to shore at any of the coasts and islands under Russian dominion, as specified in the preceding section, or even to approach the same to within a distance of less than 100 Italian miles. Any vessel contravening this provision shall be subject to confiscation with her whole cargo." To this edict, the Governments of the United States and Great Britain entered protest, in so far as it extended the dominion of Russia 4° south, and to the 100-mile limit. Mr. Adams, then Secretary of State, conceded the boundary named in the Charter to tbe Russian-American Company, viz., to the 55th parallel on the coast of the North Pacific Ocean, but resisted the claim of Russia to the coast between the 51st and 55th parallels north, also the exclusion of American ships from the North Pacific Ocean, stating that I with the Russian Settlements at Kodiac, or at Sitka, the United States may fairly claim the advantage of a free trade, having so long enjoyed it unmolested, and because it has been, and would continue to be; as advantageous to those Settlements as to them." Mr. Adams also said, " It may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore of this sea, in latitute 51° north, is not less than 90° longitude, or 4,000 miles," having exclusive reference to the Pacific Ocean. A careful examination of the protests before mentioned and the correspondence in reference thereto, as well as the Treaties which settled the controversy—that of 1824 between Russia and the United States, and that of 1825 between Russia and Great Britain—: will disclose the fact that they all had reference to the coast and waters of the North Pacific between the 51st parallel north latitude and Mount St. Elias and east of the 141st meridian of longitude. In all the protests, correspondence, negotiations, and Treaties, there is no allusion to Behring's Sea, the Aleutian Islands, or to any region of country or sea within 1,000 miles of its eastern border; hence the sovereignty asserted and maintained by Russia over that sea from its discovery to its partition and cession to the United States, a period of over ! 40 years, has never been officially questioned or denied. At the time of and when negotiating these Treaties, the High. Contracting Powers all knew of the existence of Behring's Sea, the Aleutian Islands, the Prebilov Islands (St. George and St. Paul) within Behring's Sea, and the valuable life on them and in their surrounding waters, and that these constituted the chief value of Russia's possessions on the North American coast and waters. Charts had been published before and as early as 1805 by England and Russia, as accurately bounding and defining the waters of Behring's Sea on the north-west coast to the North Pacific Ocean, as do the Maps of to-day, Behring's Sea then being called the Sea of Kamchatka. In these Treaties, there is no allusion to, or surrender of, Russia's dominion over Behring's Sea and the Aleutian chain of islands by expression or inference. Russia surrendered or abandoned her claim only to the control of the North Pacific Ocean and to tbe north-west coast south of latitude 54° north, yet her title to the Aleutian Islands, extending as far south as 51° north latitude and longitude 166° to 167° west, is not and never has "jeen disputed or invalidated. 343 It will be observed by ithe description of territory granted to us in our purchase of Alaska, that its western boundary divides Behring's Sea between us and Siberian Russia, and the fact cannot be successfully denied, ass it is a matter of history, that Russia, from her discovery of Behring's Sea down to the.cession torthe United States, has controlled the navigation of its waters and the taking of its marine life. To this end her navy has patrolled it, and, in pursuance of her laws, taken, confiscated, and burned marauding vessels; she has since pursued, and is now pursuing, the same policy on her part of Behring's Sea. In confirmation of this, I quote from,the official order, issued by the Russian Government, as late as the 13th January, 1882;:— " Notice.—At the request of the local authorities of Behring and other islands, the Undersigned hereby notifies that the Russian Imperial Government publishes, for general knowledge, the following:— " 1. Without a special permit or lic/mce from the Governor-General of Eastern Siberia, foreign vessels are not allowed to carry on trading, hunting, fishing, &c, on the Russian coast or islands in the Okhotsk and Behring's Seas, or on the north-east coast of Asia, or within their sea boundary-line. " o. Foreign vessels found trading, huuting, fishing, &c, in Russian .waters without a licence or permit from the Governor-General, and also those possessing a licence or permit who may infringe the existing byelaws on hunting, shall be confiscated, both vessels and cargoes, for the benefit of the Government. This enactment shall be enforced henceforth, commencing With a.d. 1882. ■■' " 6. The enforcement of the above will be intrusted to men-of-war, and also Russian merchant-vessels, which, for that purpose, will carry military detachments, and be provided with proper instructions." There is nothing ambiguous in the language of this Proclamation. It means that Russia will enforce her sovereignty over the western half of Behring's Sea, within her " sea boundary-line." The cession of Alaska to the United States by Russia, and the terms of the Treaty iriaking such cession, were well known to all nations, yet no protests or objeetakffiS were made, though it was well understood to convey the title to the waters of Behring's Sea, The discussion of the Treaty in the United States' Senate was notice to our nation and to all the world. In confirmation of which, I quote from'tbe remarks of Mr. Charles Sumner, Chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the Senate of the United States, at the time of the consideration of the Treaty. Mr. Sumner said, speaking for the Treaty :— "' The seal, amphibious, polygamous, and intelligent as the beaver, has always supplied the largest multitude of furs to the Rnssiam Company.' After enumerating the land furs, the value of the walrus for ivory, he adds: 'I mention the sea-otter last; but in beauty and value it is the first. In these respects it far surpasses the river and land otter, &c. I come now to the fisheries, the last head of this inquiry, and not inferior to any other in importance; perhaps the most important of all. What even are sea-otter skins by the. side of that product of the sea, incalculable in amount, which contributes to the sustenance of the human family ?' " Thus showing that the. acquisition of the products of Behring's Sea, its fur-bearing animals, and fisheries, were regarded as the chief object of the purchase,.;; Again, Mr. Summer, in the course of his remarks, said :— " ' Traversing Behring's Sea midway between the Island of Attoo on the east and Copper Island on the west, to the meridian of 173° east longitude, leaving the prolonged group of the Aleutian Islands in the possessions now transferred to the United States,; and rhajring the western boundary of our country the dividing-line which separates Asia from America.'" Mr. Summer again said :— 11 In tbe Aleutian range, beside innumerable islets and rocks, there are not less than fifty-five islands exceeding 3 miles in length; there are seven exceeding 40 miles, \rith Oonimak, which is the largest, exceeding 73 miles. In our part of Behring's Sea there are five considerable islands, the largest of which is St. Lawrence, being more than 96 miles long.'" 344 Note the expression of the distinguished Senator, | In our part of Behring's Sea." This, coming from so high an authority, in language so plain and explicit as not to admit of misconstruction, evinces the intention and understanding of the Contracting Governments, which was the partition of the sovereignty of the waters of Behring's Sea by a south-westerly line through it, the eastern portion, with Alaska, being the territory of the United States, and the western portion, with Siberian Asia, that of Russia, their combined territory and shore-lines surrounding Behring's Sea, except the northern and southern outlets. The discussion in the United States' Senate, and its final action upon this Treaty and question, was a notice to the world of Russia's right to transfer this valuable marine territory, to which not even a suggestion to the contrary has ever been raised on the part of any nation. If more were needed to convince us of the rights and intentions of the High Contracting Parties, we have only to refer to the correspondence between our then Secretary of State, Mr. Seward, and our Minister at St. Petersburgh. (Printed in executive documents for the use of Congress.) In May 1867 our Minister writes as follows :— "Sir, "Your despatch No. 241 of the 1st April, 1867, incloising the Treaty between Russia and America, ceding us all Russian America, was duly received. I awaited the expression of European and Russian sentiments in reference thereto before answering you. " I congratulate you upon this brilliant achievement, which adds so vast a territory to our Union, whose ports, whose mines, whose waters, whose furs, whose fisheries are of untold value, and whose fields will produce many grains (even wheat), and become thereafter, in time, the seat of a hearty white population." Again, in November 1867, the American Minister at St. Petersburgh, giving a description of Russian America, says, in reference to the Aleutian Islands:— "The Aleutian Islands may attract transient traders, but no permanent settlers. To. inhabit them one must be an Aleut, and if it were not for the sea surrounding the islands, this country, owing to its unfavourable climatic conditions and the sterility of its ground, would have never been inhabited at all." From the first extract, it will be observed that the American Government exercised caution before concluding the Treaty, and awaited the expression of European sentiments in reference to the same. Its acts were open and free to criticism, and the last quotation is conclusive on the point that our Gc-. ernment fully comprehended the value of the waters of Behring's Sea, and for this reason mainly was the purchase made. Had it been understood that the waters of Behring's Sea and its marine life were free to the fishermen of all nations, including ours, there could have been no incentive on the part of our Government for its purchase at the price of 7,200,000 dollars. In any other view of the case it would have been absurd, but, on the contrary, it was known that Russia did, from the time of its discovery, control these waters, and that she had ever asserted her title and maintained her dominion by causing her ships of war to patrol them. It is admitted on all sides that whatever title Russia had at the dale of the transfer of the territory we acquired and still possess, and the United States being in possession and claiming ownership, our right must be conceded until it is established that our grantor, Russia, had no title to this territory, or that she did not maintain dominion over it, which, I apprehend, cannot be successfully accomplished. There was no concealment of this Treaty or its purpose. Russia divided her possessions of Behring's Sea with us in the presence of all nations, to which there was no remonstrance on the part of any of them. By an Act of Congress, approved as early as the 27th July, 1868, it is provided: "The Laws of the United States relating to customs, commerce, and navigation are extended to and over all the mainland, islands, and waters of the territory ceded to the United States by the Emperor of Russia." It also provides. that (see Revised Statutes, section 1956) "no person shall kill any fur-seal or other fur-bearing animals within the limits of Alaska territory, or in the waters thereof." In 1881, it coming to the knowledge of the United States' Government for the first time that unauthorized persons were illegally taking seals in Alaskan waters, the Secretary of the Treasury caused to be published a notice to all that the Law prohibiting the killing of seals in Alaskan waters would be enforced against all comers, and its penalties be '345 ■ inflicted (Congress having made provision to equip the vessels of the Revenue Marine for that purpose) ; since which time this notice has been yearly published, and to-day, both this and the Russian Governments are protecting their respective dominions in the waters of Behring's Sea, as they ever have done, from all unauthorized comers. It might be interesting to continue the history of the legislation of Congress on this subject, and ascertain upon what facts it based its late action, the necessity for such action, and to speculate upon its probable results, but my time and your space will not permit. Suffice it to say, Congress had entire confidence in our title, the justice of our cause, our ability to maintain our rights, and believed that not to have maintained those rights would have been unwise, beneath the dignity of the nation, and even craven. Inclosure 2 in No. 245. Extract from the "New York Evening Post" of October 18, 1889. The Behring's Sea Question. A Reply to Congressman Felton. To the Editor of the " Evening Post." ' Sir, Salem, Mass., October 6. THE Honourable Charles N. Felton published in the San Francisco "Argonaut" of the 12th August last an attempt at a vindication of our seizures of foreign sealing-vessels in that part of the Pacific called Behring's Sea, and he says of it that it is a statement of the facts. Mr. Felton was a member of the last Congress, and also a member of the Conference Committee which had to compromise the difference between Senate and House over our last very sapient piece of legislation concerning the waters of Alaska. The positions held by Mr. Felton led the " Argonaut" to say of him that he is thoroughly conversant with the subject, a belief probably shared by many who are themselves ignorant of it, and who will therefore accept his " statement of the facts " as reliable and perfectly conclusive. There aie, however, others, and they are not few in number, whose investigations of 'this question have proved to them that the facts connected therewith are diametrically •opposed to those alleged by Mr. Felton, and who have consequently arrived at an entirely 'different conclusion. Mr. Felton's plea is not new in itself, and it does not gain by his way of stating it, which is confused and often unintelligible. The. line of argumentation followed is that jj now forced upon the special pleaders in vindication of these seizures, by the fact that the theory originally advanced, of Behring's Sea being by international law a closed sea, has been too thoroughly exploded to leave it available any longer. They therefore try to argue that if it is not a closed sea by international law, it is a closed sea by international 'acquiescence ! And then, remembering the showman's hint that, though a leopard cannot 'change his spots, you can do it for him with a brush and a little paint, they set to work to manufacture corroborative evidence. By dint of judicious suppressio veri and suggestio •fahi, they get up a semblance of proof, well calculated to impose upon the public, a good enough Morgan until after exposure. Meanwhile the one end, never lost sight of, is gained. The seizures go on, foreign competition is at least checked, and the Alaska Commercial Company is " protected " as far as possible. In order that your readers may clearly understand the points at issue between tbe defenders of the seizures and those who condemn them, let me summarize these points. The hypothesis of the defenders is, that in settling the controversy arising out. of Russia's pretensions of 1821, a discrimination was made between Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea; that while the high seas (all outside of the customary 3-mile shore belt) 'of the Pacific were declared free to all the contestants, the high seas of Behring's Sea were acknowledged to be under Russia's "exclusive dominion;" that this exclusive dominion was never denied nor questioned by any Power, was always maintained by Russia, and finally was made over by her to us, so far as it concerned our part of Behring's Sea; that consequently onr title to such dominion is unimpeachable. The argument of the opponents of seizures, on the other hand, is that there was no discrimination made between the Pacific and Behring's Sea, and that there was no call nor excuse for any, as they are identical in all that constitutes either an open or a closed sea, [128] 2 Y 53a 346 WtMl the only two kinds of sea which international usage and law recognize; that the absence of the term " Behring's Sea " from all the documents is perfectly natural, because that name is of more modern origin than the date of those papers, and because the parties to the controversy followed the safe and well-established custom of using only the common nomenclature of the times, which did not include the name " Behring's Sea ;" that all the waters of the present Behring's Sea were then, and now are, considered by all authorities on geography as belonging to, and forming part of, the Pacific Ocean; that consequently the stipulations of the Treaties of 1824 and 1825, declaring freedom of navigation and fishery in any part of the Pacific, apply to every part of Behring's Sea, and are binding on all the nations which signed these Treaties; that Russia never after the date of tbese Treaties asserted or claimed any jurisdiction over Behring's Sea, and never afterwards interfered with the fishing bythe vessels of other nations in its waters ; and last, but not least, that Russia never ceded nor pretended to cede to us any sea or dominion of any kind over any sea whatsoever. The defenders of the seizures do not produce, or even allege that.there exists, any direct documentary proof of the pretended discrimination between Pacifie Ocean and Behring's Sea, or of any acknowledgment, in express terms, of Russia's exclusive dominion. Neither do they offer any reason for this discrimination—this making fish of one and fowl of the other,—nor do they show any object -that- was to be gained by us by this abandonment of our rights under international law to the free use of Behring's Sea. Per contra, the opponents do bring ample proof, drawn from official documents, in support of every point in their arguments, as will now be shown? A collection of these documents, in convenient form, has recently been published, as Sen. Ex. Doc. No. 106, 50, C 2 S., from which I will quote. (In support of the assertion that the question of navigation and fishery was treated as concerning the whole of the Pacific, without discrimination between its different parts.) (P. 210.) Secretary Adams' letter, July 22,1823, to our Minister at St. Petersburgh, summarizes the Russian claim as extending to " an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the 45th degree of north latitude, on the Adriatic coast, to the latitude of 51° north, on the western coast of the American Continent; and they assume the right of interdicting the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast." " The United States can admit no part of these claims." (P. 214.) Our Minister at St. Petersburgh to Secretary Adams, April 19, 1824. Report on tbe Minutes of the Conference proceedings :•—■" That I must now frankly tell them [the Russian Ministers] that my instructions required that I should obtain two points as necessary conditions to the third object contemplated by the project of Convention : (I) the revocation, either spontaneous or by Convention, of the maritime provisions of the Ukase of September 4 (16), 1821 ; (2) the adoption of the commercial principle (or something similar) agreed upon between the United States and Great Britain in their Convention of 1818, in relation to these coasts; (3) that, these preliminaries being settled, a territorial delimitation for settlements at 55° might be agreed upon." (In support of the assertion that all the waters of the present Behring's Sea were, at the time of the Treaties and since, officially recognized as belonging to the Pacific.) (P. 206.) Russian Minister at Washington to Secretary Adams, February 28,1822 :— " I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, sir, that the Russian possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend, on the north-west coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent, from the same strait to the 45th degree." (This includes every part of the present Behring's Sea.) (P. 248.) Treaty of Cession, 20th June, 1867. Last clause of Article I, stating western limit of the cession :".... so as to pass midway between the Island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Komandorski couplet or group in the North Pacific Ocean . . . ." (Attou lies in 52° 57', and Copper Island in 54° 35' to 54° 55' north, or about 100 miles more northerly than the Aleutian Island of Attou, and there is no chain of islands between Copper Island and our coast-line from Behring's Strait to the south end of the Peninsula of Alaska, nothing to set off that portion of the Pacific in which Copper Island is thus officially stated to lie, from that portiou which washes our coast.) (In support of assertions concerning Treaty stipulations.) (Pp. 220-221.) A summary of the Treaty of 1824 :— Article 1. It is agreed that in any part of the great ocean commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing or in the power M"iJ'iif'i'r»iiiii 347 of resorting to the coasts upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following Articles. Article II forbids the resorting to the respective establishments without permission. Article III forbids the forming of establishments by either party, north and south respectively, of 54° 40' north. Article IV permits, during a term of ten years, the frequenting by either party of the interior seas, &c, upon the coast mentioned in the preceding Article. (In support of the assertion that Russia ceded to the United States no sea, and no dominion over any sea.) (P. 247.) Treaty of Cession, 20th June, 1867 :— Article I. Russia agrees to cede " all the territory and dominion now possessed by his said Majesty on the continent of America and in the adjacent islands, the same being contained within the geographical limits herein set forth, to wit: The eastern limit is the line of demarcation between the Russian and the British possessions in North America .... [the details are omited here as irrelevant, this line not touching Behring's Sea at any point]. The western limit within which the territories and dominions conveyed are contained passes through a point in Behring's Straits, on the parallel of 65° 30'north latitude, at its intersection by the meridian which passes midway between the Islands of Krusenstern or Ignalook, and the Island of Ratmanoff, or Noonarbook, and proceeds due north, without limitation, into the same Frozen Ocean. The same western limit, beginning at the same initial point, proceeds thence in a course nearly south-west through Behring's Straits and Behring's Sea, so as to pass midway between the north-west point of the island of St. Lawrence and the south-east point of Cape Choukotski, to the meridian of 172° west longitude; thence from the intersection of that meridian in a south-westerly direction, so as to pass midway between the Island of Attou and the Copper Island of the Komandorski [Kormandorski is a misprint] couplet or group in the North Pacific Ocean, to the meridian of 193° west longitude, so as to include in the territory conveyed the whole of the Aleutian Islands east of that meridian." Article II. In the cession of territory and dominion made by the preceding Article " are included the right of property in all public lots and squares, vacant lands, and all public buildings, fortifications, barracks, and other edifices which are not private individual property." The rest of the provisions refer to churches and to public archives. Article III refers to the rights of the inhabitants. Article IV refers to the appointment of agents for the transfer of the territory and property ceded. Article V refers to the exchange of ratification. Article VI says .... the cession of territory and dominion herein " made is hereby declared to be free and unencumbered by any reservations, privileges, franchises, grants, or possessions by any associated Companies, wbether corporate or incorporate, Russian or any other, or by any parties, except merely private individual property-holders; and the cession hereby made conveys all the rights, franchises, and privileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory or dominion, and appurtenances thereto." No sea or dominion over any sea is among the things enumerated as ceded. No dominion over an open sea like Behring's Sea could be claimed as a right ceded under Article VI, because Russia has limited these rights to such as belong to her, in the said territory or dominion and appurtenances thereto, and domiuion over an open sea is not a right attaching to territory, nor is such a sea an appurtenance to territory. Mr. Felton tells us that had it been understood that the waters of Behring's Sea and its " marine life were free to the * fishermen of all nations including ours' [sic], there could have been no incentive on the part of our Government for its purchase at the price of 7,200,000 dollars. In any other view of the case, it would have been absurd . . ." That is, of course, a matter of opinion, and on it some may prefer the judgment of men like Secretary Seward and Senator Sumner to that of Mr. Felton. But what is sure is, that these gentlemen would have left nothing at loose ends. They were the prime movers on our side in the transaction, and if they had thought that our bargain "included exclusive dominion over Behring's Sea," they would have had express stipulations to that effect inserted in the Treaty, just as Secretary Seward is known to have insisted on the insertion of the clause in Article VI (cited above) that " the territory was free and unencumbered," &c. Now let me say a few words in support of my charges against Mr. Felton and his fellow-advocates of the seizures of manufacture of evidence, of suppressio veri, and [128] 2 Y 2 348 suggestio falsi. I repeat that every allegation concerning important, facts is more or less untrue, and every essential quotation more or less twisted and perverted. To expose all of these sins here is, of course, impossible, so 1 confine myself to a few examples. Take the opening assertion in Mr. Felton's article :— "The title of the United States to Alaska and the Behring's Sea was acquired from Russia by the Treaty of Cession of 1868 [misprint for 1867], 'in which she ceded and conveyed all the rights, franchises, [and] privileges now belonging to Russia in the ceded territory or dominion, and appurtenances thereto;' the same being contained within the geographical limits herein set forth, to wit:" followed by the description of them, as quoted by me above. Here a straightforward and honest quotation of Article I of the Treaty would at once have exposed the fallacy of the above assertion as regards Behring's Sea, and so a little game of selecting and arranging suitable passages is resorted to. The most essential part, of the particulars given in Article I, the enumeration of the territory' and dominion ceded, is suppressed. For it is substituted something cut off from the end of Article VI, the general covenants of secondary importance, usual in conveyances, which can be correctly interpreted only by reference to a preceding enumeration, and then comes the rest of Article I, the description of the geographical limits. The effect aimed at, and probably attained in the case of most readers, is to hide the true import of Article I, the simple statement that everything ceded was included within certain geographical limits, and to create instead the false impression that everything embraced within these limits was ceded; to create the false impression that as a large part of Behring's Sea was situate within these limits, such part of this sea was consequently also ceded and' conveyed. In like manner Mr. Felton's mere reference to, without proper quotations from,' our protests against Russia's pretensions, destroys the emphasis, belittles and belies the scope of Secretary Adams' categorical and all-embracing, " can admit no part of these claims." Again, Mr. Felton's assertion " that Russia, from her discovery of Behring's Sea down to the cession to the United States, has controlled the navigation of its waters and the taking of its marine life. To this end her navy has patrolled it, and, in pursuance of her laws, taken, confiscated, and burned marauding vessels ; she has since and is now pursuing the same policy on her part of Behring's Sea," is simply a glaring untruth. Mr. Felton does not, of course, cite any case of such confiscation, and none occurred ; for since the Treaties of 1824 and 1825 Russia never interfered with foreign vessels fisbing in those waters, though foreign whalers frequented them during the whole of the time referred to, and literally swarmed there by hundreds during the years of the prosperity of that pursuit. On the contrary, Russia in 1842 refused officially a demand of tbe Russian-American Company for interference with those whalers on the express ground that the Treaty gave Americans the right to fish over the whole extent of the Pacific Ocean (see Bancroft's " History of the Pacific States," vol. xxviii, p. 583). And it may be well to remind Mr. Felton that seal-fishing on the high seas is just as legitimate in international law as whale-fishing there. Just as little as Russia interfered in times gone by does she do so now, and the inference to the contrary which Mr. Felton pretends to draw from an official Russian Notification of the 15th November, 1881, is as unwarranted and as misleading as most of his inferences. Mr. Felton assigns a wrong date to it, but quotes it correctly and in extenso. It forbids foreign vessels to carry on, without special permit or licence, trading, hunting, fishing, &e, on the Russian coast or islands in the Okhotsk and Behring's Seas, or on the north-east coast of Asia, or within their sea boundary-line (the italics are • Mr. Felton's). There is nothing ambiguous in the language of this Proclamation, says Mr. Felton, and this is indisputable. It is this gentleman alone who introduces ambiguity and even misrepiesentation into the discussion, when he proceeds to say : | It means that ! Russia will enforce her sovereignty over the western half of Behring's Sea within her sea boundary-line." Certain phrases have certain definite and well-established meanings, are employed exclusively in such accepted signification in official documents, and are always interpreted strictly in this sense. The accepted sense of sea boundary-line, with reference to coasts and islands, is a line three miles seaward from low-water mark on the shore, and ■ there is consequently no warrant for Mr. Felton's preposterous misinterpretation. Perusal ; of pp. 251 to 273 of the official document above referred to (Sen. Ex. Doe, No. 108) ' would have furnished Mr. Felton proof of the untruth of his assertion and of the falsity of his interpretation. Only three cases of interference are there mentioned ; none of them ' were for acts done on the high sea, but all for acts within the 3-mile limit. Two of these seizures took place in the Russian part of Behring's Sea, and if Mr. Felton's - 349 hypothesis of a division between Russia and the United States of exclusive jurisdiction over this sea has ever been adopted by our Government, the wonder is how it could consistently take any official notice of an exercise of such jurisdiction by Russia that would be perfectly legitimate under said hypothesis. Mr. Felton's manner of arguing, his way of stating a proposition and drawing inferences from it, offers a refreshing contrast to the stale rules of logic hitherto considered as binding upon a writer. His method of geographical definition is also quite novel, and I confess I have not been able to master it. Here is a specimen which is entirely beyond rae: " that they [Treaty of 1824 and other documents'] all had reference to the coast and the'waters of the North Pacific, between the 51st parallel of north latitude and Mount St. Elias and east of the 141st meridian of longitude." Mount St. Elias is a good many miles inland, and this is the first instance known to me of an inland mountain being pressed into service as a terminal point of "coast and waters." Besides, this limitation of the application of the Treaty of 1824 leaves a very Mag coast-line of the Pacific, and unquestionably not of Behring's Sea, viz., that from 141° west to the south-west extremity of the Peninsula of Alaska in about 163° 30' west unprovided for. Was there some kind of | acquiescence" about this long coast-line, too, and if so, what was acquiesced in? The passage, " Russia surrendered or abandoned her claim only to the control of the North Pacific Ocean, and to the north-west coast south of latitude 54° north, yet her title to the Aleutian Islands, extending [title or islands ? R. JR.'] as far south as 51° north latitude and longitude 166° to 167° west, is not, and never has been, disputed or invalidated," is another geographical conundrum as well as a puzzle in logic. The closing sentence in Mr. Felton's article is as extraordinary as anything he has achieved in the way of assertion : "Congress had entire confidence in our title"—that is, in our title to exclusive jurisdiction in our part of Behring's Sea. Let us see what the " Congressional Record " shows on this point: The House tacked on to a Senate Bill an amendment that section 1956 of the United States' Revised Statutes includes and applies to all the waters of Behring's Sea in Alaska embraced within "the boundary-lines mentioned and described in the Treaty with Russia dated the 30th March, 1867;" that "it shall be the duty of the President to issue an annual warning Notification, to have it published in a newspaper, and to cause one or more vessels to cruize in said waters to seize all violators of United States' laws therein." The Senate refused to pass the amendment. In conformity with the advice of the Conference Committee, the amendment was altered to the following: That section 1956 "is hereby declared to include and apply to all the dominions of the United States in the waters of Behring's Sea," leaving the new duties of the President as above, and in this shape it was enacted. The effect of the change resulting from the Senate's action is stated in the House Report to be " to leave out the words that are descriptive of the boundaries of the waters of Alaska." Mr. Felton is, of course, entitled to all the comfort he may be able to derive from this proceeding, but the public will not accept this testimony as proving " confidence" on the part of Congress. Considering that the House had actually to rescind its action, to abandon the position to which it had committed itself, the whole looks decidedly like a confession that the House felt " very shaky " indeed on the validity of the alleged title. It recalls the story of the King who quarrelled over some point in a game of chess which he had the condescension to play with a subject of his, while a crowd of courtiers preserved a dead silence. When the contention was at its height, an officer of known skill at the game entered, to whom the King appealed for a decision, and who replied instanter : I Your Majesty is wrohg !" " How can you tell when you have not even glanced at the board?" Quite unnecessary! Would these gentlemen," pointing to the courtiers, "remain silent if there was a ghost of a chance to say anything in favour of your Majesty ?" A claim in our favour and against England, which such ever-ready champions of everything anti-English as Messrs. Edmunds, Hoar, Frye, &c, refuse to support, must be indeed hopelessly week. However much one may find fault with what Mr. Felton does say in his article, it is, nevertheless, impossible not to regret that he left some things unsaid, that he found it impossible " to continue the history of the legislation of Congress on this subject, and ascertain upon what facts it based its late action, the necessity for such action, and to speculate upon its probable results. . . ." Light on all these points is certainly very much needed, and it is very much to be hoped that some Congressional Phoebus Apollo will furnish it to the public. It is indeed difficult to find or imagine any good reason for the new Act of the 2nd March last. It is superfluous, and even absurd, to make a statutory declaration that a law already enacted for a certain locality shall apply to it. The measures for its enforcement now ordered may be wise, but if they were to be confined to their legitimate sphere, they were quite within the President's authority before said sss msm aMMMHMftUSBI 350 I HI Act. They had, in fact, been already taken by Mr. Cleveland's Administration, had then been carried out in regions beyond that sphere for two seasons, after which better counsel prevailed, and they were limited to our acknowledged jurisdiction. The new law contains nothing new as to the sphere in which the old law is to be enforced; on the contrary, the attempted extension of this region was distinctly abandoned. Congress in this case, as often before, shirked the responsibility, and confined itself to "egging on.'' Secretary Blaine's assertion, that he is merely enforcing an Act of Congress when he allows the capture of foreign sealers outside of the 3-mile shore limit, is not borne out by the provisions of the Act. Apparently, Mr. Felton and his partizans are entirely unconscious of the fact that their hypothesis fairly bristles with absurdities. It presupposes that, in the settlement of a controversy seriously affecting established principles of international law, civilized Governments would deliberately stultify themselves to the extent of insisting upon these principles being strictly carried out in one part of the ocean, and of utterly ignoring them, at the same time, in the part immediately adjoining; of discriminating between seas that have not those geographical differences which international law makes the very conditio sine qud non of discrimination, and of doing all this without any documentary record of their action, and without a word of explanation as to the reason for such an unprecedented performance. Tt presupposes that the two maritime nations par excellence, Great Britain and the United States, each more powerful on the ocean than, Russia, would have surrendered to her their natural right to the free use of an open sea (expressly declared by Mr. Felton to have been known at the time as valuable), without struggle or remonstrance, without equivalent or cause! And all this idiotic travesty of patriotism, statesmanship, and diplomacy, is imputed to men of the calibre of John Quincy Adams, George Canning, and Count Nesselrode. This sorry figment of crazy suppositions is palmed off for truth, in the face of documentary proof of a natural, a reasonable, and a consistent argument to the contrary. We are urged to persist in an indefensible and dishonourable policy when there is every evidence that a legitimate and honourable course—that of international conference and agreement—would bring about every result we profess to be aiming at, and bring it about more quickly and more thoroughly than could be hoped for by any other means. The ultimate outcome of such persistence is plain; it may be delayed, but it cannol be escaped from eventually. And finally it must not be overlooked that, at the best, even a triumphant maintenance against Great Britain of Mr. Felton's hypothesis would not settle the question in our favour as against the rest of the world. Acquiescence being the basis of that hypothesis, it would be binding only upon those nations that had acquiesced. The others remain free to exercise their natural rights in Behring's Sea, and would in time undoubtedly insist upon doing so, without our having a chance of preventing them under international law. (Signed) ROBERT RAYNER. No. 246. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received November 12.) My Lord, Washington, November 1, 1889. I LOST no time, after my arrival here on the 15th ultimo, in seeking an interview with Mr. Blaine on the Behring's Sea question. He was much engaged at the time with the Maritime Conference, but he ultimately appointed Thursday, the 24th, for a preliminary conversation on the subject. We had a great deal of friendlv discussion, in the course of which he stated that the seizures of the Canadian seal-fishing vessels had been effected by the Treasury Department, which is charged with the protection and collection of the revenue (including that derived from the Ala&ka Company), and the measure had been resorted to under the belief that it was warranted by the Act of Congress and the Proclamation of the President. In this view, the Department had been confirmed by the .Judgment of the District Court of Alaska. I observed that this appeared like an assertion of the mare clausum doctrine, which I could hardly believe would be revived at the present day by his Government or any other; to which he replied that his Government had not officially asserted such a claim, and therefore it was unnecessary to discuss it. As a matter of fact, there had been no interference with any Canadian vessels in Behring's Sea except such as were found engaged in the capture and destruction of fur-seals. But his Government claim the exclusive right 351 of seal-fishery, which the United States, and Russia before them, had practically enjoyed for generations without any attempt at interference from any other country. The fur-seal was a species most valuable to mankind, and the Behring's Sea was its last stronghold. The United States had bought the islands in that sea, to which these creatures periodically resort to lay their young, and now Canadian fishermen step in and slaughter the seals on their passage to the islands, without taking heed of the warnings given by Canadian officials themselves, that the result must inevitably be the extermination of the species. This was an abuse, not only reprehensible in itself, and opposed to the interests of mankind, but an infraction of the rights of the United States. It inflicted, moreover, a • serious injury on a neighbouring and friendly State, by depriving it of the fruits of an industry on which vast sums of money had been expended, and which had long been pursued exclusively, and for the general benefit. The case was so strong as to necessitate measures of self-defence for the vindication of the rights of the United States and the protection of this valuable fishery from destruction. I replied that, as regarded the question of right, T could not admit that the seizure of the Canadian vessels was justified under the terms of the Act of Congress or of the Proclamation of the President. Municipal legislation could have no operation against foreign vessels beyond territorial waters. A claim of exclusive fishery on the high seas was opposed to international law, and no such right could be acquired by prescription. Mr. Blaine observed that he thought Great Britain enjoyed such a right in relation to pearl fisheries in some parts of the world. I said I was not aware of any such case. As regarded the question of fact, namely, the danger of extermination of the fur-seal species and the necessity for a "close season," there was unfortunately a conflict of opinion. But if, upon a further and more complete examination of the evidence, Her Majesty's Government should come to the conclusion that a " close season " is really necessary, and if an agreement should be arrived at on the subject, all differences on questions of legal right would ipso facto disappear. Mr. Blaine expressed his readiness to proceed to such an inquiry, adding that he would be prepared to establish from Canadian evidence alone the absolute necessity for a "close season ;" but he strongly insisted that the inquiry should take place here, and be entirely of a diplomatic character. It was suggested, in conversation, that the tripartite negotiation commenced in London between Great Britain, the United States, and Russia, which, from various causes, had been suspended, might be resumed in Washington. Mr. Blaine expressed his concurrence, but he said he did not wish to originate such a proposal. I stated that if such an arrangement were agreed to, I should require the assistance of experts from Canada, and it should be understood that the results of the iuquiry should, if desired, be made public to the world as a justification of the adoption of a " close season," and an inducement to all other nations to observe it. Also, that there should be an assurance against any more seizures, and an understanding as to compensation to the owners of the vessels and property seized. Mr. Blaine replied that if we did not settle the question before next April he should despair of our ever doing so, and that until that date, when the fishing season reopened, no seizures would take place, for there could be no object in them. As regards compensation, if an agreement should be arrived at, he felt sure that his Government would not wish that private individuals who had acted bond fide in the belief that they were exercising their lawful rights, should be the victims of a grave dispute between two great countries, which had happily been adjusted. He was not without hope, therefore, that the wishes I had expressed might be met, and that all might be arranged in a manner which should involve no humiliation on either side. His tone was most friendly throughout, and he manifested a strong desire to let all questions of legal right and international law disappear in an agreement for a close season, which he believes to be urgently called for in the common interest. It only now remains for me to solicit your Lordship's instructions in regard to the suggestion of resuming in Washington the tripartite negotiation, with a view to arriving, if possible, at such a solution as is proposed by Mr. Blaine. 1 have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 352 No. 247. Foreign Office to Sir C. Lampson and Co. Gentlemen, Foreign Office, November 13, 1889. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th instant, with its inclosure, again calling attention to the effects which are to be apprehended from the indiscriminate slaughter of female seals in the waters of Behring's Sea, aiid I am to say that your representations on the subject will receive careful attention. Lord Salisbury will be glad to receive any statistical evidence which you may be able to furnisli as to the extent to which the number and quality of the catch of male seals has been affected of late years by the increased slaughter of female seals in the open sea, and any other information which might be of assistance in considering the remedial measures which it may be desirable to adopt. His Lordship presumes that you would have no objection to the eventual publication of vour letter .under reply, and of any subsequent communications not marked "Confidential." I have, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 248. Sir C. Lampson and Co. to Foreign Office.—(Received November 15.) Dear Sir, 64, Queen Street, London, November 14, 1889. WE have to acknowledge receipt of your valued favour of the 13th instant, and beg to thank you for having taken the matter into consideration. (?..*$ We are now collecting all the information we can with reference to the details Lord Salisbury is anxious to obtain, and when we have completed our Statement, will forward it to you. We are quite willing to have any of our letters used as Lord Salisbury may see fit. Yours, &c. i-\-R; (Signed) C. M. LAMPSON and Co. No. 249. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.— (Received December 1.) Sir, Downing Street, November 30, 1889..r. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 9th August last, 1 am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Deputy Governor of Canada, inclosing, an important Minute of the Dominion Privy Council on tbe subject of the proposed close time for seals in Behring's Sea. I am to request that the inclosures in Sir W. Ritchie's despatch, which are sent in original, may be returned after perusal. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. 353 Inclosure 1 in No. 249. Deputy-Governor Sir W. Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, • Ottawa, November 11, 1889. WITH reference to Lord Stanley of Preston's confidential despatch of the 3rd August, 1888, in which was inclosed a copy of a Minute of Council of the 14th July of that year, protesting against the proposal made by the United States' Government for the-establishment of a close season for seals in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward herewith, for your Lordship's information, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, to which are appended certain declarations and statements tending to support the contentions advanced by the Dominion Government in the above-mentioned Minute. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 2 in No. 249. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, November 4, 1889. ON a Report dated the 26th October, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, stating that he has recently received from parties interested in the fur-sealing industry of the Behring's Sea, further information relative to seal-hunting. The Minister desires attention to the Minute of Council dated the 14th July, 18S8, made on a Report of the then Minister of Marine and Fisheries upon a proposal from Mr. Secretary Bayard, for the establishment of a close season for seals in the Behring's Sea, which was a proposition to agree to enforcing a close season from the 15th April to the 1st November in each year. The Minute of Council dealt very fully with this and pointed out:— That the United States' Minister, as reported in the despatch from Lord Knutsford, of the 8th March, 1888, then under consideration, had asserted that there were both close and open seasons for killing seals in the Behring's Sea, and that the United States' Government was endeavouring to enforce the observance of these seasons by all nationalities alike, and, consequently, that during the open season seals could be pursued without fear of molestation, whereas, in fact, the killing of seals, except by the Alaska Commercial Company, lessees of the Seal Islands, is entirely prohibited by the laws of the United Stales, and this law was then being enforced against citizens of the United States and those of Canada. That the Alaska Commercial Company, under the terms of their lease, had a monopoly of the industry, and killed 100,000 seals annually, for which monopoly they paid yearly into the Treasury af the United States over 300,000 dollars. The Minute of Council above referred to went on to show that no pressing necessity existed for the establishment of such a close season, since careful measurement of the I Rookeries" on St. Paul and St. George Islands showed 6,337,750 seals, whilst only 100,000 were annually killed, and the United States' Special Agent for Alaska in 1887, reported the seals on the increase. That as the seals arrive in May and leave about the end of October, a close season from the 1st April to the 16th November, as proposed by the Honourable Mr. Bayard, would practically prohibit all fishing except by the Alaska Commercial Company, who could kill on the only places where the seals " haul out" during June, July, September, and October, four of the months of the proposed close season, thus establishing their monopoly more effectually. That while under Mr. Bayard's proposition this area would be closed against all operations except those of their own sealers on the Pribyloff Islands, other sealing areas in America and Asia would be open to her as before. That the Alaska Commercial Company has a leasehold from the Russian Government which does not fall under the proposed area. That while the arrangement would benefit Russia and the United States, Canada would lose the whole sealing industry. [128] 2 Z LUMjjwaiuaiifflMftwiiMuaMaiHH 354 The Minister further observes that this Minute of Council called attention to the opinion of experienced sealers, who aver that by the present methods of hunting with gun and spear not more than one in ten of the seals struck is lost, and that it is not believed that these methods are so destructive as alleged. In the said Minute of Council it is claimed that the sole object of the United States was to establish a monopoly in the manner and locality of killing seals in favour of such United States' citizens who might from time to time enjoy the privilege of sealing on Pribyloff Islands. The Minister submits the appended declarations and statements in support of the views expressed in the Minute above referred to : they are as follows :— Appendix No 1. Statement prepared by practical seal-hunters. Appendix No. 2. Statement prepared by A. R. Milne, Esq., giving a history of the sealing industry as pursued by British subjects in the Behring's Sea. Appendix No. 3. Solemn declaration of Carl A. Lundburg on the slaughter of about 10,000 seals at Robin Island by the crew of the schooner "Leon," a watch-vessel of the Alaska Commercial Company. The Minister states that it will be seen that the first Appendix, in which the different hunters describe their operations in detail, fully bears out the position taken in the Minute of Council of the 14th July, 1888, that the destructive nature of the modes of killing seals by spears and fire-arms has been greatly exaggerated by the United States' authorities, a very small • percentage of loss occurring. Also that the operations of the Canadian sealers in the Behring's Sea are of necessity during the months proposed by the Honourable Mr. Bayard as a close season. The Minister desires to invite particular attention to the fact that, while female seals with pup are taken to some extent along the coasts approaching the Behring's Sea, such instances are of rare occurrence in the sea itself. Appendix No. 2 treats altogether of the history and extent of the Canadian sealing interest in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and concludes by showing that, as the seals travel singly and in pairs, not in droves or numbers as has been claimed, there is no opportunity for the indiscriminate slaughter alleged. The percentage of seals wounded or killed and not secured is placed at 6 per cent. The Minister of Marine and Fisheries is of opinion that the action described in Appendix No. 3, of the servants of the Alaska Commercial Company at Robin Island, under lease to them from Russia, in wantonly and maliciously slaughtering on their rookeries 10,000 seals at one time, principally cows.and pups, and destroying their skins for the avowed purpose of insuring the failure of other sealers, is but another argument against securing a monopoly of the seal-fishing interest in the North Pacific Ocean for the Alaska Commercial Company, and while this one act has been more destructive than the combined operations of the other sealers in the Behring s Sea, it renders altogether erroneous the interference of United States' authorities on the plea of protection with the legitimate pursuits of sealers in the open sea. -1 The Committee concurring in the above Report recommend that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, and that a copy be also forwarded to the High Commissioner for Canada for his information. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. 355 Appendix 1. Statements of Practical Hunters. James Wilson. I WAS carpenter on board the sealing-schooner " Triumph " on her voyage this year. One of the hunters was drowned just before entering Behring's Sea, and I took his place. I was out hunting seals about a week, but the weather was bad, and I got only twenty-three seals. I had had no experience. 1 used a breech-loading shot-gun, and shot seals at a range of from 10 to' 15 yards. I lost one seal through the carelessness of the boat hands ranning the boat over the seal, which sank directly under the boat. Most of seals lost by hunters are shot at long ranges with the rifle. One hunter on the. " Triumph " this year got over sixty seals and only lost one. I never saw a cow seal with her young beside her. Out of the twenty-three I got, five or six were cows carrying their young. (Signed) JAMES WILSON. Victwia, British Colwmbia, August 9, 1889. William Fewings. I have been three years hunting seals on the Pacific Coast and in Behring's Sea. In 1887 I was on board the sealing-schooner " Falvourite," in 1888 on the " Viva," and in 1889 on board the " Triumph." In each year the vessel I was on entered the Behring'^ Sea early in July, and left the sea the latter part of August or early in September, except this year, when the " Triumph " left the sea on the 11th July, under threat of seizure, after searched by the United States' cutter "Eush." In 1887 the hunters I was with were partly Indians and partly whites. In the two last years the hunters were all whites, using shot-guns and rifles. The rifles were used by the more experienced hunters and better shots for long-range shooting, up to 100 yards, but few hunters attempted that range. The general range for rifles is not over fifty yards, and most shots are made at a less range. A few hunters used the rifle for all distances. I use either rifle or shot-gun, according to the distance and position of the seal and the condition of the water. My first year I got about"400 seals. In getting this number, I failed to capture about twenty-five shot at, or killed, or wounded, but which escaped. In my second year I got over 500 and lost about thirty. This year I got 140, and lost only one. I have frequently shot from two to five seal in a bunch, and got them all. One day in 1887 I got two bunches of five "each and another of four, and got the whole fourteen. Indian hunters use spears, and either get every seal they throw at or it escapes unhurt, or but slightly wounded. Indians, it can be safely said, get every seal they kill. Oscar Scarr, a hunter on the " Viva" in 1888, got over 600 seals, and lost only about twenty. The average number lost by white hunters does not exceed six in 100, and by the Indians not six in 1,000. I have never shot nor have I ever seen a female seal with a young one beside or with her. It is very seldom a female is killed in Behring's Sea, carrying her young with her, and out of 1,000 killed on the coast earlier in the season less than one-third are females carrying their young. (Signed) WM. FEWINGS. Victoria^ British Columbia, August 9, 1889. Captain J. D. Warren. I am a master mariner, and have been actively engaged in the deep-sea sealing business for twenty years. I have owned and commanded sealing-vessels on voyages along the Pacific Coast from 47° or 48° north latitude to 56° or 57c north latitude within Behring's Sea. I have generally employed Indians, except in 1886 and 1887, the last years I was out, when I had white hunters as well. White hunters use rifles and shot-guns entirely, Indian hunters use spears. Bullets weighing from 300 to 400 grains are used with rifles, and ordinary buck-shot with guns. Both rifles and shot-guns are breech-loading, and of the best make. Seals are approached by the hunters in boats, to 10 or 15 yards, lying generally asleep on the water. Frequently seals are taken alive when asleep, especially by the Indians, who, in their canoes, get within from a spear's length (14 or 15 feet) to 30 feet before they throw. Indians rarely lose a seal they strike, and if one escapes it is always but slightly wounded. Of seals killed by white hunters, probably not over 10 per cent, are killed with rifle, which is generally used for only a long range. Sealers divide the seals for hunting purposes into two classes, "sleepers" and "feeders;" or "travellers sleepers" are almost-always shot at from 10 to 15 yards range, and are seldom lost. " Feeders " are shot at just as their heads emerge from the water. From this fact the range is always from a few feet to 100-yards, though few are fired at that distance. Hunters use a " gaff," a pole about 10 or 12 feet long, with one to three hooks upon it, with which they catch the seal and bring it into the boat. If the seal sinks, the " gaff" is run down, and the seal hooked up. The British sealing-vessels employ more Indian than white hunters. My experience with white hunters is not so extensive as with Indians, but from what I have seen while engaged in sealing I can say that not over six in every 100 seals killed by white hunters are lost or escape. Experienced hunters seldom lose a seal; the losses are chiefly made by inexperienced hunters, only a few of whom are employed, for the reason that as hunters are paid so much a skin, inferior men cannot make good wages. I have noticed no duninution in the number of seals during the twenty [128] 2 Z 2 356 years I have been in the business, but if any change at all, an increase. Of the seals taken along the coast about one-half are females, and of the females not more than one-half are with young. In Behring's Sea not one in 100 of those taken by the hunters are females with young; because as soon as the females carrying their young get into the sea they go to the breeding islands or rookeries, and in a few days their young are born. The cows remain with their young until they are quite able to take care of themselves. I do not think that out of the seals taken by Indian and white hunters more than 30 per cent, are females actually breeding or capable of breeding. "Old bulls," "bachelors," "two-year-old pups," and "Barre cows" make up the great majority- Cows actually breeding are very watchful, and while on the voyage northward are ever on the. alert, so they are difficult to take. On the other hand, the other classes above named make up tbe great class of | sleepers" from which fully 90 per cent, of the whole catch of hunters is derived. 1 never saw or heard of a "cow" having her young beside her in the water, either on the coast or in Behring's Sea. (Signed) J. D. WARREN. Victoria, British Columbia, August 10,1889. Captain Steward. I have been a master sealer for two years. In 1888 I commanded the " Araunah," and in 1889 the " Walter L. Rich," and during both years sealed along the coast from off Point Northward to Behring's Sea. In 1888 I had Indian hunters, and this year white hunters. The Indians lose very few seals, for if the spear strike the seal is got,, and if the spear misses the seal of course escapes unhurt. The white hunters use rifles and shot-guns, the latter much more than the former. Rifles are used only by good shots, and then at only long range. The seals lost by white hunters after being shot or wounded do not on the lower coast exceed six in 100, and on the Alaska coast and in Behring's Sea not over four in 100. On sailing I generally take 10 per cent, additional ammunition for waste shot, that is, if calculating on a catch of 3,000 seals, I would take ammunition for 3,300 shots. That was double the excess the hunters would consider necessary, and I never knew that percentage of waste shot to be used. I never saw a female seal with her young beside her in the water. Out of a catch of 1,423 seals this year, I had only fifty-five seals under 2 years old, i.e.,-between 1 and 2 years old. When at Ounalaska this year, I learned that the Alaska Commercial Company last year fitted out two small schooners belonging to private parties with large deep nets several hundred fathoms long, which were set across the passes leading from Behring's Sea for the purpose of catching young seals. One of these schooners got 700 of these young seals, about 4 months old, and sold them to the Alaska Commercial Company at 2 dol. 50 c. apiece. A schooner, the " Spencer F. Baird," 10 or 12 tons, was then at Ounalaska fitting up to go to Akoutan Pass for the same purpose this fall. The law forbids the killing of all fur-bearing animals in Alaskan waters by any hunters except the natives, yet such is done every year at Kodiak, Sanaka, and the Aleutian Islands by white hunters fitted out by the Alaskan Commercial Company, under the agreement that the furs must be sold to the Company. (Signed) H. F. STEWARD, Master, Victoria, British Columbia, August 10, 1889. American schooner " Walter L. Rich'' Walter House. I was a hunter on the schooner " Walter L. Rich," on her sealing voyage this year. It was my first year on the Pacific coast, but I had had seven years' experience on the Newfoundland coast catching hair-seals. This year on the " Rich " I got 185 seals and lost five, which sank before I reached them. I used a shot-gun. The hunters on the " Rich " lost about the same proportion, some a few more, some less. I never saw a cow seal in the water with her young beside her or near her, nor have I ever heard of such a case. (Signed) WALTER HOUSE. ; Victoria, British Columbia, August 10,1889. Mtmorandum Estimate of the Amount paid for Wages, &c, of the Victoria Sealing Fleet, and the probable Returns. Wages of crew and hunters, per vessel • • .. Insurance premium on 8,000 dollars, at 7 per cent. Provisions, salt, ammunition, &c. . • • • Total per vessel ., ,. For twenty vessels employed ii An average catch per vessel at, say Value per skin, 7 dol. 50 c. Value for twenty vessels ., Dollars.- 7,000 560 3,000 10,560 211,200 2,000 skins. 15,000 dollars. 300.000 „ 357 Two thousand skins is a low estimate per vessel, and were it not for the interference of the United States' cutters in Behring's Sea, the catch per vessel would average quite 3,000 skins. Captain William O'Leary. I am a master mariner, and have been seal-hunting on the Pacific coast four years, three of which I was in Behring's Sea as well. One year I had Indian hunters only, and the three years I had white hunters only—all on the schooner " Pathfinder." My experience with Indian hunters is that they lose none—at most a few—of the seals they spear. The spears are | bearded," some with one, some with two beards, and once the seal is struck, capture is certain. White hunters use shot-guns and rifles, according to distance and state of water. On smooth water and at long ranges the rifle is generally used, but the majority of hunters use the shot-gun, and the great majority di seals are shot with guns. The number of seals lost by white hunters does not exceed six in 100, and many hunters lose much less than that number. About half of the seals taken along the coast are cows, and perhaps two-thirds of the cows are with young. Putting a vessel's coast catch at 400, from 150 to 175 might be cows with young. In Behring's Sea the average of cows with young killed will not average one in 100, for the reason that as soon as the cows reach the sea they go to the breeding islands where their young are born. I never saw cows in the water with their young with them. I do not think there is any decrease in the number of seal entering Behring's Sea. I never saw so many seal along the coast as there were this year, and in Behring's Sea they were more numerous than I ever saw before. This year I shot forty-four seals and lost one. (Signed) ' WM. O'LEARY. Victoria, British Columbia, September 12,1889. Frederick Gilbert. I am a seal hunter. I have been four years on board sealing-vessels, one year I was a boat rower, and three years a hunter. I have always been with white hunters, and have used the shot-gun and rifle for shooting seals. In 1887 I got 518 seals and lost 14 ; in 1888 I got 244 and lost 5 ; in 1889 I got 454 and lost 16 ; or in the three years I got 1,216 seals, and lost 35, or 2$ per cent. I never shot or saw pups with the cows in the water, nor have I ever heard of such a case. Some hunters lose a few more than I do, but the most unlucky hunters I have met with did not lose twice as many. (Signed) FRED. GILBERT. Victoria, British Columbia, September 12, 1889. George Howe. rT7* My first 3rear's sealing, 1886, was on board the " Theresa " from San Francisco to Victoria. We left San Francisco on the 20th January, and arrived at Victoria on the 7th April. I got 159 seals, of which I lost about 7. I used a shot-gun principally, the rifle only for long range shooting, say, from 30 to 60 yards. At Victoria I left the "Theresa" and joined the "Pathfinder." The "Pathfinder" left Victoria on the 4th May for Behring's Sea, and that trip I got 442 seals and lost about 20. In 1887 I joined the " Penelope," and left Victoria on the third February. I got 618 seals during the season and lost 31. In 1888 I did not go sealing, but in 1889 I was engaged on the schooner " Viva;" we left Victoria on the 19th January, and I got 734 seals during the season and lost 37. I never saw a young pup alongside its cow in the water. About one-third of the seals taken on the coast are cows with pup or capable of being with pup. In Behring's Sea I got four cows with pups in them. (Signed) GEORGE HOWE. Thomas Howe. In 1886, on board the " Theresa " and " Pathfinder," I got for the season 397 seals, and lost about 20. In 1887, on the schooner "Penelope," I got 510 and lost about 30. In 1888, on the "Lily Lad," I got 316 and lost 12. In 1889, on board the "Viva," I got 587 and lost 27. (Signed) THOMAS HOWE. Albert J. Bertram. This was my first year hunting seals. I went out on the " Annie C. Moore." We left Victoria on the 25th January. I got during the season 320 seals. I use a shot-gun principally. On the coast I got about 25 to 30 females with young in them, and in Behring's Sea I got about .6 or 7. I never saw a cow with her pup alongside of her in the water. I lost 21 seals that sank before I could reach them. (Signed) A. J. BERTRAM, n mm jJUIUJI JIJU' 358 {Appendix 2' Statement by Mr. Milne. WITH regard to the early history of the sealing industry in British Columbia, it is well known that, owing to the sparse Settlements on the west coast of Vancouver and Queen Charlotte Islands, the taking of seals and the hunting of the sea otter was followed, only by our Indian population, who pursued this industry in their own primitive manner, that is, by using the canoe and spear, and seldom venturing beyond sight of land. Their success was only known to the traders who had stores or stations, or trading schooners usually visiting the -west coast during that season; the white population up to later years being chiefly engaged in other occupations. Sealing and deep-sea fishing did not seem to attract-., nmch attention. The few seals caught by the Indians adjacent to the coast was not considered sufficient inducement to our seamen, and also th$ Jiabits. of the seal, their regular yearly migration from Behring's Sea, and their long journey and return following the food fish, were all matters not full known or understood by our people. At all events, it does not appear that that knowledge was possessed of the seal life by our hunters, presented any extra inducement to them to follow this hazardous occupation. Up to the year 1865-66 the sealing industry remained in the hands of the west coast Indians; but in the year 1866 the schooner " Kate," of Victoria, British Columbia, in charge of Dutch Harry and Ogilvie, left Victoria on a sealing and trading venture to the North Pacific and Behring's Sea. The success of the venture is unknown. It is ?aid that this voyage was more for tracing than seal hunting, and as expeditions of the former kind were plentiful at that time, the United States having about that time accpiired possession of Alaska. It is now generally hQheyed that they did not enter Behring's Sea for the purpose of sealing. At all events, the parties are now dead, and no authentic record can be found as to their: success,(if any) as a sealing voyage. After that time some few years appear to have elapsed before the sealing" business was much noted, it beina.-attractive to only a few traders engaged on the west coast in the usual barter and exchange with Indians. The pioneers of the sealing industry,-naBaely, -James D. Warren, Hugh McKay, and William Spring (of whom the first mentioned only survives to impart the early history of the now important industry) reaped the reward of toil, and havS^etiteu'lfc enjoy the fruits of their labour. About the years 1878-79 the schooners belonging to the port of Victoria, British Columbia, began to extend their voyages seawards, and the migrations of the seals became better understood. Schooners cruizing southerly in the early spring months would meet the returning seals, bound northward. At this time the following schooners engaged in this traffic:— 'Thornton" \ Anna Beck ' 'Favorite " ' Onward J Owned by Captain J. D. Warren. Ditto. Owned by Captain Hugh McKay. Ditto. In the year 1880 the schooner " Mary Ellen," a vessel 63 tons, was purchased by William Spring, and added to the sealing fleet at Victoria; and in the years 1881-82 auxiliary steam power was added to the " Anna Beck " and " Thornton," and several new vessels were built. The sealing industry at this time was considered in a fairly prosperous condition. In the year 1883, the American schooner " San Diego," of San Francisco, of which Daniel McLean was master, his brother Alexander McLean being mate (both Nova Scotians), fitted out in San Francisco for the North Pacific and Behring's Sea on a walrussing and sealing voyage. With a crew of thirteen men they hunted along the west coast of California and British Columbia, starting about the 1st June, 1883. During the voyage, which lasted till the end of August, they spoke no vessel or Revenue- cutter, nor had any communication with any one. They returned to Victoria after a successful voyage. The following vessels were engaged on the west coast as sealers in the years 1882-83, but which did not enter Behring's Sea. All were fairly successful:— Schooners— " Favorite " . " Alfred Adams " . " Anna Beck " " Dolphin " " Grace V • " Onward " "Thornton" . "W. P. Sayward". ;, Black Diamond ". Tons. 80 60 (69) 40 60 77 35 29 60 82 Iii the year 1884 the schooner " Mary Ellen," of Victoria, British Columbia, Daniel McLear master, fitted out at San Francisco with a crew of sixteen men to hunt seals along the west coast, anc entered Behring's Sea about the 15th June and left about the end of August of the same year. The voyage was satisfactory to owners and crew. They prosecuted their legitimate and peaceful voyage to the high seas without any interference from any one. In the same year the schooners "Favorite," "Anna Beck," "Alfred Adams," "Dolphin," "Grace" " Onward," " Thornton," " W. P. Sayward," and " Black Diamond," were all engaged in the sealing industry in the North Pacific. In the year 1885—considered a prosperous one for sealers—the " Mary Ellen " and "Favorite," of Victoria, having entered Behring's Sea during June and leaving about the end of August, and the other schooners, as per list attached hereto, hunted in the North Pacific, but not entering Behring's Sea. 359 A number of vessels were added to the fleet in the following year (1886), and the enterprising firm, Came and Munsie, brought around Cape Horn the schooner " Pathfinder." This latter led to some immigration from eastern provinces of the hardy class of seamen so well adapted to the sealing industry. All the vessels clearing from Victoria, British Columbia, entered Behrrffg's Sea with the exception of the schooners § Active " and " Rustler;*4.ost off Vancouver's Island. The same year (1886) is also remarkable' for the seizures of the " Carolina," " Onward," and "Thornton," the attending circumstances of which is now a matter of history. These vessels, fitted out at Victoria for sealing in the waxfers of the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's sea, and at the time of seizure (1st and 2nd August, 1886), were about 70 miles from the nearest land. The United States' Revenue-cutter took them to Ounalaska. The crews of the "Carolina" and | Thornton," with the exception of the captain and one man detained on board, were sent to San Francisco, nearly 1,000 miles from home, and turned adrift to beg their bread, and by appealing to the charity of the humane to find their way back to their homes on Vancouver's Island. The crew of the " Onward " was kept at Ounalaska. The master and mate of the '". Thornton " were brought to trial before a Judge named Dawson, in the United States' District Court at Sitka; and if half the stories that are told are true as to the manner in which Courts are conducted in Alaska, we cannot be surprised at the verdict. The trial was a farce on justice, where international law or comity had no consideration. " The Britisher must suffer," and he was found guilty accordingly. The master of the " Thornton " was sentenced to thirty days' imprisonment and a fine of 500 dollars; the mate to thirty days' imprisonment and a fine of 300 dollars. The master and mates of the " Onward," as also the officers of the " Carolina," were likewise mulcted of snoilar penalties. The master of the latter vessel, one James Ogilvie, an old man and a pioneer of Brinish Columbia, well thought of by owners and crews sailing from his port, of Victoria, after suffering harsh, and inhuman treatment at the hands' of the servants of the mighty Republic which blatantly proclaims its love for the right, was suffered to wander into wood, where he died from want and exposure. The other masters and mates, after remaining in prison for several months, were released by order of the Governor of Alaska upon his being besought by the inhabitants of Sitka in the interests of humanity. They were turned out of confinement literally destitute, without food or shelter, and compelled to find their way back as best they might to their homes 1,500 miles distant, reached only by a long and costly voyage, or by the friendly help of the Indian and a canoe over a tempestuous wintry ocean. The story of poor Ogilvie, the taunts of an unscrupulous Judge, characterizing them as pirates and robbers, the subsequent imprisonment in a foul Alaskan dungeon (fit only for a savage Aleut), whT long be told as a travesty on the humane acts of a friendly Government. The schooners have since lain on the beach at Ounalaska, worm-eaten and worthless. In 1887 the Government of the United States concluded to give these vessels up, and in a letter from Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West, dated the 11th October, 1887, the following extract appears:— " In the meantime, in acknowledging your note, I take occasion to state my impression that if the three vessels seized and ordered to be released have not been re-possessed by their owners, it is not because of any hindrance on the part of any official of this Government or failure to obey the-order for release, but-probably because of the remoteness of the locality (Ounalaska) where they were taken after arrest for adjudication, and the proceedings.having, been in rem, the owners have not seen.proper to proceed to Alaska to re-possess themselves of the property in question." Again, on the 13th October of the same year we find the following from Mr. Bayard to Sir L. West:— " Sir, "Department of State, Washington, October 13,1887. " Continuing my reply to your note of the 29th ultimo inquiring the reason for the delay in complying with the order issued in January last for the release of the British vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea, I beg leave to inform you that I have this day received a communication from my colleague, the Attorney-General, informing me that his telegram to the United States' Marshal at Sitka of the 26th January last,- ordering the release of the British schooners " Onward," " Caroline," and " Thornton," owing to some misconception and mistake on the part of the official to whom it had been addressed, had not been acted upon. A renewed order has gone forward for their release, as had been distinctly directed last January, and which I had no reason to doubt had been promptly obeyed. (Signed) " T. F. Bayakd." From the foregoing it naturally would be believed by all reasonable people that the Secretary of the United States would have had due respect for the proprieties of international comity, and see that his order would be carried into effect before the close of the year 1887. Such was not the ease, whatever intervened in this diplomatic shuffle. It did not materialize before the 1st November, 1888, and not until the 10th November of that year did Messrs. Came and Munsie receive the following:— "District of Alaska, United'States' Marshal's Office « Sir, Sitka, November 1,1888. " You are hereby authorized and directed to deliver to the rightful owner, Messrs. Munsie and Co., Victoria, British Columbia, the seized schooner " Caroline," of Victoria, British Columbia, her tackle, apparel, and furniture, as she now lies in the Harbour of Ounalaska. (Signed) " Barton Atkins, United States' Marshal. " E. H. Wall, Esq., United States' Deputy Collector of Customs, Ounalaska, Alaska." 360 " District of Alaska, United States' Marshal's Office; " Gentlemen, Sitka, November 1,1888. " I have the honour to inform you that I have received from the honourable Attorney-General of the United States orders to release to the rightful owners the schooner " Caroline," her tackle, apparel, and furniture, as she now lies at the Harbour of Ounalaska, in the district of Alaska. The order on the Deputy Collector of Customs at Ounalaska to deliver' to you the property is herewith inclosed. I Very respectfully, (Signed) " Barton Atkins, United States' Marshal. " Messrs. Munsie and Co., Victoria, British Columbia." In the year 1887 the vessels enumerated on list on p. 178 entered Behring's Sea after finishing the spring season. The names of the schooners and dates of the seizure, together with dates of their sale at Port Townsend, W. T., where they were' taken after postponements and delays, also appear. They were sold on the 26th March, 1889, currently report at the time disposed of at a nominal value. All the vessels named on the list, p. 179, went to sea in 1888, proceeding to Behring's Sea, and were, with the exception of the " Araunah," which was seized, successful. This seizure was made on the 1st July of that year by the Russian schooner " Alexander II," and taken to the port of Vladivostock Russian Siberia. All the vessels enumerated on p. 179 went to Behring's Sea in 1889, and the return of the " Triumph " and capture of the " Black Diamond," and subsequent escape, are all fresh in the memories of our people, and need not be here repeated. In conclusion, I have omitted remarks on the many questions arising in regard to the seizure of our vessels, feeling assured that the Government is doing everything to bring the matter to a speedy settlement. Also in regard to the habits of the seal, many erroneous opinions being given in the American press, and by the paid officials of the Alaska Fur Company as to the loss of seals by wanton slaughter (as they term it) of our sealers, I have made due and diligent inquiry as to the percentage of seals liable to be lost after being shot, and from what I have gathered, it amounts, at most to only 6 per cent. The habits of the seal are now well understood. They travel singly and in pairs, not in droves or numbers as has been supposed by some, and to cover a large expanse of water. They are found 400 miles westward of Vancouver Island, and migrate to Behring's Sea in September and October. The pups leave later in November, the temperature of the water having some influence upon their movement, but they always return to Behring's Sea in June of every year. Vessels cleared for North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, 1885. Schooners. Mary Ellen Favorite White crew and hunters. White crew and Indian hunters. Vessels Cleared for North Pacific Ocean, but did not enter Behring's Sea. Schooners. Tons. Alfred Adams .. j 69 Anna Beck 46 Black Diamond .. • ,. 82 * Carolina ... 32 Dolphin ., . • • 60 Grace 77 Kate .. 58 Mountain Chief ., 23 Onward 35 Thornton 29 W. P. Sayward ,, . .. 60 KM 361 Vessels cleared for North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, 1886. Schooners. Tons. Alfred Adams .. 09 Anna Beck 46 Active.. .. .. .. 42 Foundered April 1, 1887. Black Diamond .. .. .. " .. 82 Dolphin .. .. ,, .. 80 Favorite . • .. 80 Grace . • .. .. .. .. 77 Carolina .. .. ... ., 32 Seized August 2, 188G, by United States' Government. Kate .. 38 Mountain Chief .. .. .. .. 23 Mary Ellen .. .. .. ,, 63 Onward .. .. .. .. 35 Seized August 1, 1886, by United States' Government. Penelope •• •• ,. .. 70 Pathfinder 66 W. P. Sayward .. 60 Thornton .. .. ., 29 Seized August 1, 1886, by United States' Government. l£-**^Sa Teresa.. .. .. 63 Rustler .. .. ., 29 Wrecked February 26, 1887. 'Rustler" did not enter Behring's Se VESSELS cleared for North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, 1887. Schooner. Tons. Disposition. ' Ada .. 55 Seized August 25, 1887, and sold by United States' Government at Port Townsend, W. T., March 26, 1889. Alfred Adams .. .. .. .. 69 Anna Beck .. .. .. ., 40 Seized July 2, 1887, and sold by United States' Government at Port Townsend, W. T., March 26, 1889. Black Diamond .. .. .. .. 82 Dolphin .. . • .. •. 60 Seized July 12, 1837, and sold by United States' Government at Port Townsend, W. T., March 26, 1889. Favorite .. .. . • 80 Grace .. .. .. *• .. 77 Seized July 17, 1887, and sold by United . States' Government at Port Townsend, March 26, 1889. Juanita .. .. .. .. 48 Kate .. 58 Mary Taylor .. .. .. 43 Mountain Chief .. .. .. .. 23 Mary Ellen . • • • .. 63 Penelope • • •. • • * * 70 Pathfinder .. .. .. .. 66 Sapphire .. .. .. .. 124 W. P. Sayward .. 60 Seized July 9, 1887, by United States' Government, and released under bonds. Triumph •• •• •• .. 15 Teresa.. ... •. .. .. 63 Viva .. .. .. .. .. 92 Wanderer . • .. . • 16 Lottie Fairfield .. .. .. .. 150 [128] 3 A 362 Vessels cleared for North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, 1888. Schooners. Tons. Disposition. Annie C. Moore.. • 113 Araunah • 71 Seized July 1, 1888, by Russian Governmsnt.. Aurora . 41 Black Diamond . 82 Favorite . 80 Juanita 40 Kate .. 58 Lily .. Letitia . • 69 28 ^Coming. Mary Taylor Mountain Chief • 43 23 Mary Ellen 63 Maggie Mc 71 Penelope Pathfinder 70 60 Sapphire • W. P. Sayward . 124 60 Triumph 16 Teresa .. 63 Triumph . Viva .. • 98 92 Wanderer 16 '~ Winifred" ' . 13 Vessels cleared for North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, 1889. Schooners. Tons. Ariel .. Annie C. Moore Aurora.. Black Diamond Favorite Juanita Kate .. Lily .. Letitia.. Mary Ellen Mary Tavlor Maggie Mc Mountain Chief Pathfinder Minnie.. Penelepe Sapphire W. P. Sayward Triumph Teresa .. Triumph Viva Wanderer Winifred 90 113 41 82 80 40 58 69 28 63 43 71 23 66 46 70 124 60 98 63 15 92 16 13 Seized July 11. Seized July 31. Seized August 27. Seized July 15. Ordered off July 11. Besides our own twenty-four British vessels, it is said that thirty-two of other nations have cleared at San Francisco and Puget Sound ports, all intending to go to Behring's Sea this year. 363 Came and Munsie Ditto IffoSS! Ditto D. McLean.. E. C. Baker and Co. C. Spring .. Ditto Not known.. Jacobsen Marvin and Cox McDonald .. A.Frank .. Ditto Gray and Moss Dodd and Co. Lundberg and Co. Hall and Goepel Moore and Hackett Babington and Co. Bucknan .. Indians • 5 Paxton and Co. Muir, Brothers Indians •• Mary Taylor /Pathfinder Viva Mary Ellen Triumph Favorite.. Kate Aurora .. Minnie .. Sapphire "Winifred Black Diamond Lily Penelope Maggie Mc. W. P. Sayward Juanita . • Annie C. Moore Teresa .. Ariel .. Mountain Chief Wanderer Triumph 'Letitia • • Tonnage. 1,464 Value of Outfit. Dollars. 8,000 10,000 12,000 8,000 14,000 8,000 7,000 8,000 8,500 15,000 2,500 9,500 8,500 10,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 15,000 10,000 9,000 3,000 5,500 3,000 2,000 WHtei' TiMenijI Indians. 'itfrffV)? 200.500 262 Memorandum. .Estimates of the Amount paid for Wages, &c, of the Victoria Sealing Fleet, and the probable '; Returns. Dollars. Wages of crew and hunters, per vessel .. ..' ., .. .. .. 7,000 Insurance premium on 8,000 dollars, at 7 per cent. .. .. .. •. 560 Provisions, salt, ammunition, &c. .. .. .. .. .. .. 3,000 Total per vessel .. For twenty vessels employed 10,560 211,200 An average catch per vessel at, say I Value per skin, 7 dol. 50 c. Value for twenty vessels • • 2,000 skins. 15,000 doUars 300,000 . Two thousand skins is a low estimate per vessel, and were it not for the interference of the United States' cutters in Behring's Sea, the catch would'average quite 3,000 skins per vessel. Appendix 3. Declaration of Carl A. Lundberg. City of Victoria, Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada. I, CARL A. LUNDBERG, of the city of Vancouver, in the Province of British Columbia,, late of the city of Yakohama, Japan, fisherman, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. In the year 1883 I was ship-keeper of the schooner "North Star," of Yakohama aforesaid. The said schooner was engaged in hunting and fishing in Okhotsk Sea and Kurile Islands. 2. In the month of September the said schooner was in the vicinity of Eobin Bank; or Island, returning from Cape Patience. One day towards the end of said month of September, I, with a number of others from the said schooner, landed on a beach of said Robin .Island. On the island I met the mate of the schooner " Leon," a vessel in the employ of the Alaska Commercial Company as a watch vessel, about the said Robin Bank, or Island. The said mate had with him about fifteen natives of the Aleutian Islands. WHle on shore we discovered a great heap of dead and rotten seals piled against the cliff at the back of a narrow strip of smooth beach such as seals haul up on. I examined the seals, and found that they had been driven into a heap, clubbed, and afterwards a great number had been cut and mutilated so as to destroy the skins and hasten decay. The said mate of the " Leon " was present, and I asked him why he had killed all of these thousands of seals— cows and pups. He replied, " That is to keep any of these Yokohama fellows from getting anything this year." I asked him for his authority for being on the island and killing the seals. He.showed me a.document signed by the Alaska Commercial Company, directing him not to allow any persons to land on the island excecpt the servants of the Company. I asked him who gave him the paper ; he replied, he could not tell. The document referred to was nailed to the wall of the house occupied by the mate and his men, [128] 3 A 2 361 3. Next morning I went back to the beach with thirty-three men, the crews of my own vessel, and the schooner " Helena," which was also at the bank. We began at once to drag the dead seals to the water, and, after three days and nights hard work, we got the beach cleared. Every man was ordered to keep count of the number of dead seals he dragged off the beach, and when the work was done we found that the total -number in the pile was between 9,000 and 10,000, nearly all cows and pups. There were thousands of seals in the water, but they would not pull out on the beach on account of the stench and filth. We washed the beach as clean as we could, and turned the gravel over as far as we were able. Shortly a heavy gale came on which washed the beach quite clean again, and the seals then began to puU out. And I make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue; of the Act respecting extra-judicial oaths. (Signed) C. A. LUNDBERG. 1889 Declared and affirmed at the City of Victoria, British Columbia,' the 5th day of October, AJ). Before me, (Signed) A. L. Beltea, A Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia, No. 250. International Arbitration and Peace Association to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 7.) 40 and 41, Outer Temple, Strand, London, My Lord, December 6, 1889. THE Committee of the International Arbitration aDd Peace Association have had again brought under their notice the very unsatisfactory state of affairs that has long prevailed regarding the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea and the adjacent coasts. The proceedings of the United States' cruizers in seizing and sequestrating—and, in some cases, confiscating—the vessels and cargoes of British subjects engaged in fisheries on the open sea, have caused—as, no doubt, your Lordship is too well aware—excessive and prolonged irritation amongst our fellow-citizens of the Canadian Dominion, as it would appear that those in command of Her Majesty's vessels on the Pacific Coast feel themselves, for some reason, unable to check the high-handed proceedings of the United States' cruizers; while those measures of redress, long since demanded by Her Majesty's Government, and ostensibly conceded by the United States' Government, do not appear to have ever been carried out, or compensation made to the victims of admittedly lawless seizures. Our Committee are more free in addressing your Lordship on this subject, inasmuch as the principles of international law involved in these transactions, and the violation of established Regulations affecting the freedom of the seas, both seem so clear, that they feel persuaded that the whole subject has only to be brought afresh to the serious attention of the United States' Government to insure a settlement of the questions at issue and the termination of a grave occasion for irritation and complaint on the part of Her Majesty's Canadian subjects. In venturing thus to press this international question on the attention of Her Majesty's Government, our Committee take leave to refer to your Lordship's despatch of the 10th September, 1887, in which the whole history of the case is clearly recapitulated, and tbe judicial principles concerned are cogently indicated. Our Committee trust that now that public attention has been again drawn to this cause of prolonged friction, the arguments in the above-named valuable State paper will- be again placed before the authorities of the United States, and feel persuaded that an amicable settlement may now be speedily sought for and attained. We have, &c. (Signed) W. MARTIN WOOD, Vice-Chairman, J. FREDK. GREEN, Secretary. £r£7J£ OOt) No. 251. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.— (Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, December!, 18S9. I HAVE been informed that a telegram has been received by the Secretary of State for the Colonies from the Governor-General of Canada, reporting that his Council have expressed the following views in regard to reopening negotiations with the United States' Government on the subject of the Behring's Sea seal fishery. It is held by the Government of Canada, on evidence which they deem sufficiient, that no real danger exists of the extermination of the seal fishery in Behring's Sea. They therefore contend that, if the United States' Government are not of that opinion, that Government should make the proposals which they consider necessary for the protection of the species. If, however, the renewal of negotiations is considered expedient by Her Majesty's Government, Canada will agree to that course on the following conditions : — 1. That the United States' Government shall first abandon any claim to regard the Behring's Sea as a mare clausum, and that any existing legislation in the United States, which would seem to support that claim, shall be either amended or repealed. 2. That there shall be a direct Representative of Canada on the British Commission entrusted with the negotiations, in the same manner as at the negotiations for the Treaty of Washington in 1871, the Fisheries Commission under that Treaty, and the Treaty of Washington of last year. 8. That any conclusions which may be the result of the negotiations shall be referred to the Dominion Government for approval. 4. That Great Britain and Canada, without Russia, shall conduct any negotiations for compensation for losses to British subjects arising out of the action of the United States' authorities. I have to request you to inform me whether you consider that these proposals will furnish the bases of possible negotiation. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 252. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, December 10.) My Lord, ' Washington, December 12, 1889. IMMEDIATELY on the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 7th instant, containing certain proposals of the Dominion Government in relation to the Behring's Sea question, and instructing me to report whether, in my opinion, those proposals furnished a basis of possible negotiation, I obtained an interview with Mr. Blaine, and I sounded him on the subject of Canada being directly represented in any diplomatic negotiations which might be renewed for the settlement of the controversy. Mr. Blaine at once expressed his absolute objection to such a course. He said the question was one between Great Britain and the United States, and that his Government would certainly refuse to negotiate with the Imperial and Dominion Governments jointly, or with Great Britain, with the condition that the conclusions arrived at should be subject to the approval of Canada. I did not touch on the other proposals, for the following reasons. As regards the abandonment of the mare clausum claim, no such claim having been officially asserted by the United States' Government, they would naturally object to withdraw it; and as regards the suggested amendment of their legislation, such a proposal would gravely embitter the controversy, and is hardly necessary, as I conceive that there is nothing in the terms of such legislation, if correctly interpreted, with due regard to international law, which supports the mare clausum claim. Lastly, it has never been suggested that Russia should intervene in the question of compensation, but on that question also the United States' Government will insist on negotiating with Great Britain alone. imiujuuuimii 366 In my opinion, therefore, the proposals of the Dominion Government do not furnish a basis of pcssible negotiation. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 253. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 10.) Sir, Downing Street, December 10, 1889. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, containing the views of his Government as to the proposed negotiations at Washington for the establishment of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. As at present advised, Lord Knutsford is disposed to think that the conditions (b),. (c), (d), upon which the Dominion Government are willing to enter upon the negotiations, may be acceded to; and his Lordship trusts that the point referred to in (a) may prove capable of arrangement. 1 am to take this opportunity of transmitting to you, for Lord Salisbury's information, copies of the despatch and the telegram to which this message replies. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 253. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. My Lord, Downing Street, November 23, 1889. HER Majesty's Government have been informed that a proposal to renew at Washington the diplomatic negotiation commenced last year between the Governments of the United States, Great Britain, and Russia, with a view to prevent the extermination of seals in Behring's Sea by their wholesale destruction during the breeding season, would be acceptable to the Government of the United States. In commencing negotiation it would be desirable to obtain, in the first place, an admission from the United States' Government that they have no right to claim the Behring's Sea as amare clausum, and thus admission will of course remove a serious impediment which had embarrassed the discussion of the various questions at issue. Another point to be kept in view, would be the consent of the United States' Government to give such directions as may be necessary for the prevention of any further seizures of Canadian vessels in the Behring's Sea, though it may be observed that the negotiations ought to be satisfactorily concluded before April, until which month there would be no question of further seizures. With regard to the compensation payable on account of past seizures, there is reason to believe that the United States' Government would propose that this subject should form a part of the general negotiations. I think I am right in concluding that the Dominion Government is now prepared to concur in any reasonable arrangement for the establishment of a close season in Behring's Sea, and I therefore anticipate that your advisers will agree with Her Majesty's Government in thinking it expedient to commence the suggested negotiation at an early date, Her Majesty's Minister being assisted during the negotiation by an officer or officers of the Canadian Government. You will understand that the conclusions which may be arrived at by the Representatives of the three Powers would be reported to their respective Governments for consideration, and would not be binding upon the subjects of any Power which has not accepted them. I have explained to the High Commissioner for Canada the general nature of this proposal, and I shall be glad to learn by telegraph that your Ministers agree with Her Majesty's Government that Her Majesty's Minister should be instructed to propose i It Mil1 bWawWUHa rases BSK 367 formally to the United States' Government the resumption of the tripartite negotiation Washington in the event of his receiving- satisfactory assurances from Mr. Blaine on tl at tory assurances Irom Mr. JBiaine on the subject of the compensation claimed for British subjects, and the cessation of seizures. I-have, &c. (Signed) KNUTSFORD. Inclosure 2 in No. 253. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, December 5, 1889. HOPE that Colonial Government agree to proposal indicated in my despatch of 23rd November on the seal fishery question. Her Majesty's Government anxious for reply by telegraph as soon as possible. Inclosure 3 iu No. 253. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government-House, Ottawa, December 6, 1S89. I HAD the honour to send to your Lordship to-day a telegraphic message, of which; the following is the substance :— "In reply to your telegram Privy Council, at a meeting held to-day, recommend a,, reply to be sent as follows:— 11. Satisfactory evidence is held by Canada that the danger of extermination does notreally exist. " 2. That if United States' Government holds different opinion the proposal should be made by them. "If it is deemed expedient by Her Majesty's Government to initiate proceedings, Canadian authorities consent to a reopening of negotiations on the following conditions:— " (a.) That the United States abandon its claim to consider Behring's Sea as a mare clausum, and repeal all legislation seeming to support that claim. r " (b.) That as in the cases of the Washington Treaty 1871, the Fishery Commission' under that Treaty and the Washington Treaty 1S88, Canada shall have direct representation on the British Commission. " (c.) The approval of Canada to any conclusions arrived at shall be necessary. i " (d.) Russia to be excluded from the negotiations in reference t o compensation and. seizures." I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. jSTo. 254. |f Foreign Office to International Arbitration and Peace Association. Gentlemen, Foreign Office, December 11, 1889. 1 AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 6th instant, in which, on behalf of the Committee of the International Arbitration and Peace Association, you call attention to the question of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. I am to state, in reply, for the information of your Committee, that this matter is receiving the earnest attention of Her Majesty's Government. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. stmmitmmmm rw* 368 No. 255. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 12.) Sir, Downing Street, December 12, 1889. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 24th October, relating to the seizure, by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea, of the British schooners •*' Juanita" and " Pathfinder," I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, for such action as his Lordship may think proper, copies of two despatches from the Deputy Governor of Canada, forwarding claims for compensation for loss sustained by reason of such seizures. I am, &c. (Sigued) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 255. Deputy Governor Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, November 14, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 21st ultimo, dealing with the seizure of the "British schooner " Juanita " in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to transmit herewith a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting the claim to compensation advanced by the owners of that vessel against the United States' • Government for loss incurred by reason of her seizure. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 2 in TSo. 255. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 9th November, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 4th November, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in connection with the seizure in the Behring's Sea of the British ; schooner " Juanita," the circumstances attending which were detailed in a Minute of Council dated the 14th September, 1889, formal statements and claim to compensation ■for loss incurred by reason of the seizure of said vessel, and the transfer of the United :States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush" of her cargo of sealskins and twelve spears, as well as the estimated balance of sealskins to complete the vessel's catch had she not been interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, which, with incidental expenses, aggregate 14,695 dollars. The Minister observes that the claim is advanced by Mr. Richard Flail, of Hall, Goepel, and Co., of Victoria, British Columbia, part owners and business managers, and by Mr. Charles E. Clarke, part owner and master of the vessel in question ; and he recommends that this claim be forwarded through the proper channel to Her Majesty's Government, for transmission to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward copies hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies for transmission to the Government of the United States, as recommended by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. . All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council 369 • Inclosure 3 in $0. 255. Affidavit of Charles E. Clarke. City of Victoria, Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada. I, CHARLES E. CLARKE, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:—. ■ ;.,','' %*P 1. I am the duly registered owner of sixteen sixty-fourths of the British vessel "Juanita." schooner-rigged, of the port of Victoria aforesaid, the other owners of said vessel being Richard Hall, merchant, William J. Goepel, merchant, both of the said city of Victoria, and Hans Helgeson, of the same place, fisherman, each owning an equal number of shares in said vessel. 2. On the 7th day of May, a.d. 1889, I cleared the said "Juanita" at the Customhouse at the said port of Victoria for a sealing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. On the said voyage I was master of said vessel, and had a sailing crew of four men. The "Juanita" sailed from the port of Victoria on the Mh May last, and was equipped and provisioned for a full season's voyage and purposes above mentioned. 3. On the west coast of Vancouver Island I took on board fourteen Indian hunters, and then sailed northward. 4. On the 2nd day of July last the "Juanita" entered Behring's Sea through the Ounimak Pass. 5. Early in the morning of the 31st July last the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush" steamed up to the "Juanita" and demanded that I heave mv vessel to. I did so, and was at once boarded by three officers from the " Rush." The officer in charge asked me if I had any sealskins on board, and asked me if I had taken any seal in Behring's Sea. I told him I had come inro the sea on the 2nd July, and had about 600 skins on board. He then reported to the Captain of the " Rush," informing me that he would have to seize my vessel and her cargo. 6. The Captain of the "Rush" ordered the sealskins to be taken from the "Juanita" and put on board the "Rush," which was at once done, the number taken being 600. A demand was made by the boarding officer for my ship's papers, and all guns, ammunition, and spears on board. He obtained the shfp's papers and spears (twelve in number), which were taken on board the "Rush." 7. Hereto annexed, marked "A," is a copy of the certificate of seizure given to me by the officer from the said steamer "Richard Rush," who also instructed me to proceed to Sitka, in the territory of Alaska, and to deliver a sealed letter, which he then handed roe to the United States' District Attorney of that place. 8. Being unable to continue sealing and hunting, I sailed out of Behring's Sea, and arrived at Victoria aforesaid on the 30th day of August last. 9. On my arrival at Victoria I handed the said sealed letter to the Collector of Customs. 10. Had the "Juanita" not been seized, and her hunting implements taken away, 1 verily believe that, the said "Juanita" would have made a total catch in Behring's Sea the full season of 1889 of not less than 1,800 sealskins. Declared at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, by the said Charles E. Clarke, the 15th day of October, a.d. 1889. (Signed) CHARLES E. CLARKE. Before me, (Signed) Akthtjb, Lotjis Bel yea, A Notary Public by Royal authority in and for the Province of British Columbia, residing and practising at Victoria aforesaid. [128] 3 B 370 .Indosiife 4 in Fo. 25$. Certificate, .t£-;': United States' steamer "Rush," Behring Sea, To whom it may concern. Lai. 55° 42' N, Long. 170" 40' W., July 31, 1889. THIS will certify that I have this day seized the British schooner " Juanita," of Victoria, British Columbia, C. E. Clarke, master, for violation of Law, section 1956, Revised Statutes, United States, and. taken possession of his ship's papers, consisting of registry and clearance. (Signed) L. G. SHEPARD^ Captain, United States' Revenue Marine. This is the exhibit marked (A) referred to in annexed Declaration of Charles E. Clarke, made before me the 15th day of October, 1889. (Signed) A. G. Beltea, Notary Public. Inclosure 5 in No. 255. Affidavit of Richard Hall. City of Victoria, Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, I, RICHARD HALL, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, merchant, of the firm of Hall, Goepel, and Co., do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That the said firm of Hall, Goepel, and Co., are the owners of thirty-two shares of the hereinafter-mentioned schooner "Juanita," of the Port of Victoria aforesaid, and are the business managers of the said schooner. 2. The said schooner was in May last sent by the said firm on a sealing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. 3. The said schooner returned to Victoria the last of August, having taken, as I am informed, and do believe, by the captain of the said schooner, on said voyage, 652 sealskins, of which number the said firm received only thirty-two skins, sent to us from said schooner by the "Wanderer" before the " Juanita" entered Behring's Sea, said thirty- two sealskins having been taken outside Behring's Sea. 4. The remainder of the sealskins taken by the "Juanita" was, as I am informed by the said captain, and do verily believe, taken from the "Juanita" on or about the 31st day of July last, when said schooner was in Behring's Sea, by the orders of the Commander of the United States' steamer " Richard Rush." 5. The market value of sealskins at the said Port of Victoria on or about the 1st October instant, when, in the ordinary course, the "Juanita " would have arrived after a full season's voyage aforesaid, was 8 dollars a skin. 6. From the number of sealskins taken by the " Juanita " up to the said 31st July I verily believe that the said schooner would, in a full season, have taken at least 1,800 sealskins. 7. At the same time the sealskins were taken from the "Juanita" by the officers of the said United States' steamer 1 Richard Rush," there was also taken by the said officers, as I am informed by Captain Clarke, and do believe, twelve spears, the value of which was 3 dollars each, and the ship's papers. 8. The said firm of Hall, Goepel, and Co., claims damages against the Government of the United States of America for such taking and detention of sealskins, spears, and ship's papers, based upon the value, of the skins actually taken, and for 1,178 skins, the balance of an estimated catch of 1,800 sealskins by the said schooner for full season of 1889 in Behring's Sea ; also for the value of the said spears, and for the cost of obtaining a new set of ship's papers from the Government of Canada, and for legal and other expenses in connection with the preparation and submission of this claim. 9. That hereto annexed, marked "B," is a statement in detail of such claim. 10. That upon the sailing of the said schooner in May last, advances were made to the hunters based upon a full season's catch, and said, hunters will, upon payment of such claim, be entitled to and will receive their share thereof. 371 And' I, Richard Hall, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting Extra-Judicial Oaths. Declared by the said Richard Hall at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, the 14th day of October, a.d. 1889. (Signed) RICHARD HALL. Before me, #f£a (Signed) A. L. Belyea, A Notary Public by Royal authority in and for the Province of British Columbia, residing and practising at Victoria aforesaid. Inclosure 6 in No. 20§.' Detailed Statement of Claim by Owners of British Schooner "Juanita" against the Government of the United States of America. 620 sealskins taken from "Juanita'' in Behring's Se& by United States' steamer " Richard Rush," at 8 dollars per skin 1,178 sealskins, balance of an estimated catch, of 1,800 sealskins by the "Juanita" for the full season of 1889 in Behring's Sea, at 8 dollars per skin .. .. .. .. .. 12 spears, at 8 dollars Cost of obtaining new ship's papers .. .. .. ■ .. Legal and other expenses incidental to the seizure .. i. otai .. .. .. .. .. .. Dols. c. 4,960 00 9,424 00 36 00 25 00 250 00 ■14,695 00 (Signed) RICHARD HALL. This is the exhibit (B) referred to in the declaration of Richard Hall hereto annexed, .made before me the l4th day of October, 1889. (Signed) A- L. Beeyea, Notary Public. Inclosure 7 in No. 255. Deputy Governor Ritchie to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Ottawa, November 15, 1889.1 WITH reference to my despatch of the 23rd September last, relating to the seizure in Behring's Sea of the British schooner "Pathfinder" by the United States' ■Revenue cutter " Rush," I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council submitting the claim to compensation of the managing owner of that vessel for the loss sustained by reason of her seizure by the United States' authorities. I have, &c. (Signed) W. J. RITCHIE. Inclosure 8 in No. 255, ■Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 9th November, 1889. ON a Report dated the 5th November, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and 'Fisheries, submitting in connection with the seizure in Behring's Sea of the British .schooner "Pathfinder," the circumstances attending which were detailed in a Minute of Council dated the 14th September, 1889, formal statement and claim to compensation far sloss incurred by reason of the seizure of the vessel and tbe transfer of her cargo to thje :United.States' Revenue cutter "Richard- Rush," as well as the estimated balance of sealskins to complete the • vessel's'catch, had she not been interfered with in-the legitiBflajjS •pursuit of her galling, aggregating 26,765 dollars. &$'%&'4*'i*!£&)& 'H7'a • [128] ' 3 B 2 ' "miL^u.jiujj LfiJUULill.lB.fl!!']'!! S95 372 mV> The Minister observes that the claim is advanced by Mr. William Muns;e, of tbe firm of Carne and Munsie, of Victoria, managing owner of the vessel in question, and he recommends that this claim be forwarded through the proper channel to Her Majesty's Government for transmission to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward copies hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for tbe Colonics, for transmission to the Government of the I'nited States, as recommended by the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 9 in JNo. 255. Affidavit of William Munsie. City of Victoria, Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada. I, WILLIAM MUNSIE, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, merchant, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. I am a member of the firm of Carne and Munsie, merchant, of the said city of Victoria, the said firm being composed of Frederic Carne, Junior, of the same place, and myself. 2. The said Frederic Carne, Junior, is the registered owner of sixteen shares of the hereinafter mentioned schooner | Pathfinder," of the Port of Victoria; I am the registered owner of sixteen slvares of the said.schooner, and the said firm are registered owners of the remaining thirty-two shares. I am the managing owner of the said schooner. 3. Tne said schooner " Pathfinder" cleared at the Custom-house, Victoria, aforesaid, on the 17th day of April, a.d. 1889, for a hunting and sealing voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and sailed on the 18th day of April, a.d. 1889. 4. On the said voyage William O'Leary was master, and Andrew Davidson-was mate. The crew consisted of a cook, twelve seamen, and five hunters. 5. On the 24th July last I received from the said | Pathfinder " by the schooner "Wanderer" from the north, 558 sealskins which had been caught by the " Pathfinder'r in the Pacific Ocean on her way northward to Behring's Sea. 6. On the 30th August last the said " Pathfinder " returned to Victoria aforesaid, having on hoard an officer from the United States' steamer " Richard Rush." Captain O'Leary reported to me that on the 29th day of July last the said United States' steamer "Richard Rush" hailed him in Behring's Sea about 57° 24' north latitude aud 171° 55^ west longitude, and ordered him to heave to. The " Pathfinder" was immediately boarded by officers from the said " Richard Rush." The officer in charge seized the "Pathfinder" and took away all the sealskins on board (854), eight shot-guns, four rifles, six boxes of ammunition, a quantity of salt, and the ship's papers. He left an officer on board in charge, and ordered Captain O'Leary to take the " Pathfinder " to Port of Sitka, in the Territory of Alaska. 7. At the time of such seizure the sealing season in Behring's Sea was less than half gone, and I verily believe that had the " Pathfinder " remained unmolested in Behring's Sea until the close of the season she would have caught not less than 2,100 sealskins. I bave tlus on information given me by the said Captain O'Leary and by Captain Baker, of the schooner " Viva," also owned by us and managed by myself, who was in the Behring's Sea the whole season of 18S9. The hunting equipment of the said two schooners was about equal. A few davs before the " Pathfinder " was seized as aforesaid, she was spoken by the " Viva." At that time the " Pathfinder" had 419 sealskins on board, and the | Viva " 420. The " Viva " caught in the full season in Behring's Sea 2,182 sealskins, and for the year a total of 3,641 skins. 8. In the year 1888, and this year 1889, the said firm of Carne and Munsie shipped their sealskins to London on their own account, and hereto annexed, marked (B), is a copy of the account sales of part of the catch of the | Pathfinder " for the year 1888 ; and hereto annexed, marked (C), is a copy of the account-sales of the said | Pathfinder's | catch of seals in the spiing of 1889, before going north. The sealskins per first account sales (1888) netted the said firm at Victoria, British Columbia, about 12 dol. 25 c. per skin, and, per the second account sales, they netted the said firm about 10 dol. 30 c. per J vm 373 skin at Victoria, British Columbia. The catch of 1889 was a spring catch, which always contains a larger percentage of small skins than the summer and fall catches, and hence realize less per skin on an even market. 9. I, for myself, the said Frederic Carne, Junior, and for the said firm of Came and Munsie, claim damages against the Government of the United States of America for the seizure of the said " Pathfinder," and for the taking and detention of the said 854 sealskins, and for 1,-46, the balance of the estimated catch of 2,100 in Behring's Sea for a full season ; also for the guns, rifles, ammunition, salt, and ship's papers seized as aforesaid ; and for legal and other expenses incidental to, and arising out of, such seizure, and the preparation and submission of this claim therefor, and interest thereon at 7 per cent. per annum. 10. Hereto annexed, marked (A), is a Statement in detail of such claim. 11. I am in constant communication with my agents in London, England, and from information I have received from such agents, I verily believe that the price of summer and fall catches of sealskins from North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea for 1889 will be fully up to the price obtained for the " Pathfinder's " catch, sold as per account-sales (B), hereto annexed, namely, 12 dol. 25 c. per skin net, at Victoria, British Columbia.' 12. That I have paid .in full the crew and hunters of tbe " Pathfinder " for the season of 1889, including the sums due to them in respect of the 854 sealskins seized as aforesaid. And I, William Munsie, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting Extra-Judicial Oaths.1, Declared by the said William Munsie, at Victoria, the 18th day of October, a.d. 1889, before me. (Signed) WILLIAM MUNSIE. (Signed) Arthur L. Belyea, A Notary Public by Royal authority in and for the Province of British Columbia, residing and practising at Victoria, British Columbia. Inclosure 10 in 2JTo. 255. (A.) STATEMENT of claim by owners [of schooner "Pathfinder" against the Government of the United States of America, for seizure in Behring's Sea on the 29th July, 1889. Dol. c. • 854 seal-kins (seiz>"d). 1,246 skins, balance ol estimated catch by " Pathfinder" for full season 1889 ia Behring's Sea, 2,100 skins, at 12 dol. 3.5 c. each 8 shot-guns, at 25 dollars each .. .. .. •. 4 rifles, at 25 dollars each .. .. .. .. 6 boxes ammunition, at say .. .. >. .. Salt.. Cost of obtaining jxew ship's papers .. .. .. Legal and other expenses arising out of, and incidental to, such seizure J. O till • • • • • • • • a :• 25,725 00 440 00 100 00 200 00 25 00 25 00 250 00 26,765 00 And interest thereon at 7 per cent, per annum until paid. (Signed) WILLIAM MUNSIE. This is the Statement of claim referred to in the declaration of William Munsie, as- marked (A), hereunto annexed, and made the 18th day of October, 1889. Before me, (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. !V 374 United States' Revenue Steamer "Rush," Lat. 57° 24' W$m Sir, Long. 171° 55' W,, Behring's Sea, July 29, 1889. You are hereby appointed a special officer, and are directed to proceed on board the schooner "Pathfinder," of Victoria, British Columbia, this day seized for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes of the United States, and assume charge of said vessel, her officers, and crew, twenty white men all told. Excepting the navigation of the vessel, which is reserved to Captain O'Leary, and which you will not interfere with, unless you become convinced he is proceeding to some other port than your port of destination, in which event you are authorized to assume full charge of the vessel. Everything being in readiness, you will direct Captain O'Leary to make the best of his way to Sitka, Alaska, and upon arrival at that port you will report in person to the United States' District Attorney for the District of Alaska, and deliver to him the letter so addressed, the schooner, her outfit, and the persons of Captain O'Leary, Mate, A. Davidson, and set the crew at liberty. After being relieved of the property and persons entrusted to your care, you will await at Sitka the arrival of the " Rush." Respectfully, (Signed) L. C. SHEPARD, Captain,-United States' ^Revenue Marine. T. W. Hunter, Special Officer. WILLIAM MUNSIE. London, July 14, 1889. (Prompt, July 18, 1889.) Account Sales. Sold by order and for account of Messrs. Carne and Munsie, a. p. sale. Per " Pathfinder." C. P. Lot. 10, 11 12 13, 14 15 and M. 6 and p. 11 casks salted fur-seal skins. 67 small fur-seal skins, at 50s. each 101 large pups ditto, at 53s. each 74 middling ditto, at 52s. each .. 97 small ditto, at 44s. each 35 "ex "ditto, at 27s. each 4 middling ditto, at 31s. each .. 2 small ditto, at 31s. each - 380 Discount 2£ per cent. June 24— Landing charges, telegrams, &c. ... .. Housing and striking, 380 at 3s. 9d. per 100 Piling away to sorter, 380, at Is. 10^d. per 100 Weighing for average, 100, at 2s. 6d. per 100 Cessing for assortment, 380, at 2s. 6«l,per 120-. Counting at delivery, 380, at Is. 'id. per 120 Rent on 380, at 6 p. 320 \vk., 14 wks. ' .. • Showing for public sale, lotting, &c. .. Allowance, 20 per cent, on £2 ISs. 4<Z. Assorting for sale, 380, at 5s. 2\d. per 100 .. Public sale charges, advertising, &c, 6 lots, at 3s. 6c?. Fire insurance, £ per cent. * .. Commission, 2\ per cent. £ s. d. # m • • 167 10 0 ;, e . , 267 13 0 # ^ . . . . 192 8 0 •• •• •• 213 8 47 5 0 0 , # m , # # 6 4 0 • • • • * * 3 2 0 897 10 0 • • • • * * 22 8 9 875 -1 3 £ s. d. # .. 1 3 9. , .. 0 14 3 „ .. 0 7 1 J .. o 2 6 , .. o 7 11 , .. 0 4 10 m .. 0 6 •4 • .. 0 11 3 3 17 1 .. 0 10 8 3 6 5 m .. 0 19 10 ' ... 1 1 0 -.. -2 4 11 y%*\ .. 22 8 9 30 0 11 845 0 4 (Signed) CULVERWELL, BROOKS, and Co. WILLIAM MUNSIE. J This is the exhibit marked " C "• referred to in the declaration of William Munsie, made before me the 18th day of October, 1889. »W -* (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. Per " Pathfinder." ..ot. 1. 13 small 2. 110 large. 3. 107 middl 4. . 59 small 5. 9- "ex." 2 middl; 6. 81 large 7. 82 hjrge 8. 71 middl 9. 31 small 56£ P. 10 casks, salted fur-seal skins fur-seal skins, at 49s. each .pups ditto, at 58s. each .. ipg ditto, at 58s. each ditto, at 51*. each ' ditto, at 27s. each ,ing ditto, at 27s. each .. pups ditto, at 52s. each ., pups ditto, at 53s. each ,. ing ditto, at 52s. each ditto, at 43s. each . . Discount 2\ per cent November 1— Landing charges, telegrams, &c. .. .. Housing and striking, 565, at 3s. 9c?. per 100 Piling away to sorter, 565, at Is. 10i|c?. per 100 Weighing for average, 150, at 2s. 6c?. £>er 100 Cessing for assortment, 565, at 2s. 6c?. per 120 Counting at delivery, 565, at Is. 3c?. per 100 Rent on 565, at 6 p. 120 p. wk., 5 wks. Showing for public sale, lotting, &c. .. Allowance, 20 per cent on £4 Is. 10c?. Assorting for sale, 565, at 5s. 2\d. per 100 .. Public sale charges, advertising, &c, 9 lots, at 3s. 6c?. For insurance .. .. .. . . . Commission, 5 per cent.. .. •. P. 10 ca Lot. 1. 13 small salted" fur-seal s rins, at 2. 110 large pups ditto ,. 3. 107 middling ditto .. .. 4. 59 small ditto .. 5. 9 ex small ditto .. .. 2 middling .. .. 6. 81 large pups ditto .. 7. 82 ditto, ditto ,. 8. 71 middling ditto ,. .. 9. 29 small ditto mm . 2 ditto, ditto « • SSH5 fans SMW? December 4, 1888. This is the exhibit marked " B " referred to in the declaration of William Munsie, made before me the 18th day of October, 1889. (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. Messrs. Carne and Munsie, We have this day sold for your account at public auction the undermentioned in conformity with the sale conditions. Prompt, the 4th December, 1888. Discount, 2\ per cent. Ex "Pathfinder LWILIllMJ.! 376 1 ii Ex "Viva/* V. 32 casks. Lot. 10. 3 wigs fur-seal skins, at • • .. 10 midd ling ditto.. . 4 « .. 11. 47 small ditto • • .. 12,13. 200 large pups ditto • « .. 14,17. 372 ditto, ditto . . .. 18,21. 400 middling: ditto.. s. .. 22, 23. 200 ditto, ditto . . .. 24. 65 ditto, ditto .. ,. ., 25; 28. 400 small diftb .. ' , . * % .. 29. 100 ditto, ditto .. 8 , • 30. 55 ditto, ditto .. . , ,J^j;VV0i 31. 119 ex sra-ill ditto .. . , . . .32. 39 large ditto I • . . 33. 26 middling ditto ' 5 . . 34. 16 small ditto .. " .. . . 35. 16 grey ditto -. •• Total, 6.580J. 12s. Ad. 70s. 70s. 58s. 55s. 56s. 54s. 55s. 56s. 46s. 47s. 46s. 32s. 49s. 41s. 32s. 15s. each. 47, St. Mary Axe. (Signed) CULVERWELL, BROOKS, and Co. Ctjlverwell, Brooks; and Co. 27, St. Mary Axe, London, February 2, 1889. Result of Sales of Salted Fur-Seal Skins. 17,133 North-west Coast 5,576 Lohbs Island " offered and sold. There was again a good demand for this important.article at the sales held on the 1st instant, and all classes Sold readily at the advanced prices established at the November auctions. The skins were chiefly purchased by the English, Erench, and American buyers. There is every indication of prices being maintained. Prices. North-west Coa-t. Lobos Islands. s. s. s. s. Middlings and smalls . a . • 30 | 40 .. Smalls • . . . 29 46 23 to 41 Large pups . . > * 30 53 29 36 Middling ditto .. .. . a -a 25 55 27 33 Small ditto .. .. .. . . . . 22 41 19 26 Ex small ditto .. .. 19 38 16 21 Ex. (x. small ditto .. •. .. ' a- 15 24 •• With Culverwell, Brooks, and Co.'s compliments. Messrs. Carne and Munsie. COXVERWELL, BROOKS, AND Co. 27, St. Mary Axe, J^ondon, November 9, 1888. Special Result of Sales pf Salted Fur-Seal Skins, November 9, 1888. 100,000 Alaska .. .. ) ■9,003 North-west Coast J- offered and.sold, 13,333 Lobos I Jand .. ) ■ There was a large attendance of buyers at these sales, and throughout active competition prevailed, and.on all .classes .an important adv£mce was established. In the Alaska collection 4he smaller sizes realized lekvtively -the highest prices. We quote 377 middlings, smalls, and large pups, 28 per cent, to 26 per cent, dearer, and middlings and smalls, middling pups, small pups, and extra small pups, 43 per cent, to 48 per cent, higher. The 9,003 North-west Coast contained one fine parcel which realized extreme rates, and on other parcels an average advance of 20 per cent, to 30 per cent was established. The 13,333 Lobos Islands skins contained one good parcel of 2,000 skins, which realized 40 per cent higher rates. The other assortments were not of a desirable description, but 20 per cent, higher rates were paid. The few Alaska skins dressed in their natural state by a well-known English firm, sold as follows:— Middlings and smalls, 130s. each; smali, 118s., 119s.; large pups, 93s., 94s.; middling pups, 78s.; small pups, 66s., 67s.; extra small pups, 63s. each. These prices include the cost of dressing. Prices. Wigs Middlings and smalls Middlings .. Smalls Large pups Middling ditto Small ditto Ex. small ditto .. Ex. ex. small ditto .. Grey ditto Alaska. North-west Coast. s. s. 23 to 28 68 to 120 68 62 50 42 50 116 92 81 66 62 26- 33 29 29 26 21 19 14 11 45 45 51 54 51 39 29 26 Lobos Islands. s. d. s. d. 29 0 to 30 0 27 0 30 0 24 0 37 0 21 0 37 0 12 0 31 0 8 0 20 0 1 6 8 6 With Culverwell, Brooks, and Co's compliments. To Messrs. Carne aud Munsie, Odd Fellows' Buildings, Douglas Street, Victoria, British Columbia. No. 256. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 13.) Sir, Downing Street, December 13, 1889. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram which be has addressed to the Governor- General of Canada respecting the proposed negotiations at Washington on the subject of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 256. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, December 11, 1889, 9 P.M. IN reply to your telegram of 6th instant. Sir J. Pauncefote telegraphs: Mr. Blaine says that his Government have never asserted mare clausum doctrine, and will make no disclaimer, but that the question will be disposed of by international agreement for close time. United States' Government do not agree to Canadian representation in negotiation as to close time. Proceedings would not be in the form of a Commission, but a Diplomatic Conference. British Minister would be advised by Canadian Assistant; and as conclusions would not be binding unless accepted by Governments, it would seem unnecessary to press for direct representation of Canada. Russia would not intervene in negotiations as to compensation to British subjects. [128] 3 C 378 No. 257. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 14.) Sir, Downing Street, December 14, 1889. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 13th instant, inclosing copy of a telegram which had been addressed to the Governor-General of Canada, relating to the proposed negotiations at Washington on the subject of the establishment of a close time for seals in the Behring's Se:i, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram received from the Governor-General, in reply, communicating the views of his Government on points connected with this matter. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 257. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) (Received December 14, 1889.) SUBSTANCE of Resolutions passed at meeting of Council yesterday :— Mare clausum doctrine has been asserted by United States of America, by instructing its officers to seize vessels in mid-ocean, by setting up that doctrine in the Courts, by obtaining condemnation of ships on that doctrine, and by selling the property of Canadians under such condemnation. Canada expects British Government not to conclude arrangement unless Behring's Sea declared in it to be free. She adheres to opinion that agreement as to close season and preservation of seals should be subject to her approval as one of the parties chiefly interested in the question. Agreement as to close season should be terminable by each of the Parties to the Treaty. Canada fails to understand objection of the United States of America to a Canadian being direct Representative of Her Majesty's Government; but to avoid delay, will defer without further protest to course decided on by Her Majesty's Government. No. 258. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received December 16.) Sir, Downing Street, December 16, 1889. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for the Colonies to request that you will inform the Marquis of Salisbury, with reference to the telegram from Lord Stanley of Preston on the proposal to resume negotiations respecting the Behring's Sea (a copy of which was transmitted to you in my letter of the 14th instant), that his Lordship, after conferring with Sir Charles Tupper, is of opinion that the concurrence of the Canadian Government in that proposal is now sufficiently complete, and that Her Majesty's Minister at Washington may be instructed to make a formal communication to the United States' Government on the subject. Lord Knutsford observes with satisfaction that the Dominion Government, although strongly impressed with the necessity arising out of the acts which it recapitulates in the first sentence of the telegram under consideration of concluding no arrangement which does not either comprise or rest upon a definitive assurance as to the freedom of the Behring's Sea, is now willing to waive the requirement that a declaration by the United- States' Government to that effect shall precede the resumption of the negotiations, and to leave for future consideration at what time and in what manner this assurance shall be obtained. On the second point raised in the telegram, Lord Knutsford thinks there can be no question as to complying in some form or other with the desire of Canada that no rules as to a close season shall be finally adopted-unless she concurs in them. As the negotiations between the Representatives of the three Powers will be a diplomatic discussion ad referendum, and as Great Britain has no special interest in the Behring's Sea except on behalf of the Canadian fishery, this country could have no object in assenting to any conclusions unacceptable to the Canadian Government. The tplea;ram does not state the reason for which the Dominion Government proposes 3/9 thai any one party to'the Agreement shall have the power of terminating it, and, on this point, it will be desirable to consider the text of the Resolutions of the Privy Council when received; but Lord Knutsford apprehends that, as the Dominion Government considers it demonstrable that no close time is needed for the preservation of the seals, a fortiori it holds that any close time which may be prescribed in the first instance may possibly, after trial, be found needlessly injurious to the fishery, and should be practically subject to revision. As the Dominion Government withdraws its stipulation for the direct representation of Canada in the negotiations, it will not be necessary to discuss this point further at the present time, and Lord Knutsford concludes that simultaneously with the discussion as to the close time, a Commission, comprising a Canadian Representative, but upon which Russia will not be represented, will consider the compensation to be paid in respect cf the seizures of British vessels, and other losses arising out of past interference with them. Lord Knutsford would therefore propose, with Lord Salisbury's concurrence, to reply to this telegram that Her Majesty's Government is glad to find that the Dominion Government consents to the negotiation in the form proposed, and will consult that Government at stages, and conclude no agreement as to a close time without their approval, and requests that a Representative of the Dominion Government may be ready to proceed to Washington as soon as Sir J. Pauncefote has received his instructions. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. :V No. 259. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir Foreign Office, December 16,1889. I HAVE laid before tbe Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 10th instant, in which you inclose copies of two despatches from the Deputy Governor of Canada, forwarding claims for compensation for losses sustained by the owners of the British schooners "Juanita" and "Pathfinder," in consequence of the seizure of those vessels by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea. His Lordship directs me to request you to inform Lord Knutsford, in reply, that these claims will be considered, together with those of other owners of vessels which have been seized, in the negotiations which it is proposed to conduct with the United States, and the commencement of which is waiting for the consent of the Canadian Government. I am, &c- (Signed) P. CURRIF. No. 260. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Foreign Office, December 17, 1889. Sir, I COMMUNICATED to the Secretary of State for the Colonies your telegram of the 9th instant in regard to the question of reopening negotiations with the United States' Government on the subject of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. The Governor-General of Canada was made acquainted with the views of the United States' Government, as expressed in that telegram, and a reply has been received from him to the following effect:— " The Government of Canada expects that no arrangement will be concluded with the United States by Her Majesty's Government in which it is not expressly declared that the Behring's Sea is free. " They adhere to their view that any agreement as to a close season and the preservation of seals should be made subject to the approval of Canada, as one of the parties whose interests are primarily involved ; and they consider that each of the parties to the Treaty should have the power of terminating the close season Agreement. "The Dominion Government are unable to understand why the United States should object to Her Majesty's Government being directly represented by a Canadian Delegate, but, in order to avoid delay, they are willing to defer without further protest to the course decided on by Her Majesty's Government." I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. 128] C 2 meem 380 No. 261. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, December 17, 1889. 1 HAVE to inform you that the Secretary of State for the Colonies has had under his consideration, in consultation with Sir Charles Tupper, the views of the Canadian Government, communicated to you in my despatch of this day's date, respecting the proposed reopening of negotiations with the United States on the Behring's Sea question. Lord Knutsford is of opinion that those views express with sufficient completeness the concurrence of the Dominion Government in the bases which would render such negotiations possible. They are willing to abandon their former demand that, before the opening of the negotiations, the United States' Government should make a declaration disclaiming any pretension to regard the Behring's Sea as a mare clausum. The condition under which Canada is to be consulted before the final acceptance of any rules as to a close season would appear to present no difficulty, inasmuch as the discussions will be ad referendum. Her Majesty's Government are not yet in possession of the text of the Resolution of the Canadian Privy Council, recommending that the close-season agreement should be terminable by both parties to the Treaty, but there would seem to be nothing unreasonable in such a stipulation. Although the Canadian demand for a direct representative has been withdrawn, Lord Knutsford is of opinion that a Commission upon which Canada, but not Russia, should be represented, might consider the question of compensation for losses arising out of the action of the United States' authorities at the same time as the discussion on the close- season agreement is being carried on. Lord Knutsford will inform the Governor-General of Canada, by telegraph, that Her Majesty's Government are glad to learn that the Dominion Government consent to the reopening of negotiations in the form proposed; that the Dominion Government will be consulted at all stages of the discussion ; and that no agreement as to a close season will be concluded without their approval. Lord Knutsford will, at the same time, suggest that a Canadian representative should hold himself in readiness to proceed to Washington as soon as you have received your instructions in1 regard to the negotiations. You are now authorized to make a formal communication to the United States' Government in conformity with the instructions contained in this despatch. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 262. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, US reply to your letter of the 16th instant, I am directed by th to transmit herewith, for the information of Lord Knutsford, a.co which have been addressed to Her Majesty's Minister at Washing make a formal proposal to the Government of the United States negotiations on the Behring's Sea question. I am at the same time to say that Lord Salisbury concurs in Knutsford proposes to return to the telegram from the Governor copv of which accompanied your letter of the 14th instant. I (Signed) December 17,1889. e Marquis of Salisbury py of the instructions ton,* directing him to for the resumption of the reply which Lord General of Canada, a am, c. P. CURRIE. * No. 261 381 No. 263. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 18.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, December 18, 1889. I HAVE received your telegram of yesterday. It would be desirable that proposed communication of Colonial Office to Canada as to her consent to close season agreement be deferred. I think Mr. Blainn will agree to an arrangement for a fixed term, and afterwards terminable at will of either party; but I am sure he will not consent to Commission to assess compensation. I have suggested that we should agree to a lump sum before the negotiation. He is considering the proposal with the President of the United States. May I defer sending in a note until your Lordship has received my private letter, and until Mr. Blaine's answer reaches me ? No. 264. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, December 18, 1889. I HAVE received your telegram of this day's date, respecting the proposed negotiations on the question of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. With reference to the request in the last paragraph, I have to inform you that you are authorized to defer making a formal proposal to the United States' Government until you receive a reply from Mr. Blaine as to the possibility of agreeing upon a lump sum for the compensation of the owners of vessels seized by the United States' authorities. 1 am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 265. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury. -(Received December 23.) My Lord, Washington, December 13, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 12th instant, I have the honour to inclose herewith an extract from the Report of the Secretary of the Treasury for the year 1889 on the subject of the seal islands in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 265. Extract from the Report af the Secretary of the Treasury for the year 1889 on the subject of the Seal Islands in Behring's Sea. THE lease now held by the Alaska Commercial Company, of the exclusive right to take fur-seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, in Behring's Sea, expires on the 1st day of May next. By the provisions of sections 1963 to 1967, Revised Statutes, the Secretary of the Treasury is required to lease to proper and responsible parties, for the best advantage of the United States, having due regard for the interests of the Government, the native inhabitants, their comfort, maintenance, and education, the right of taking fur-seals on the islands named, and of sending vessels thereto for the skins so taken, for the term of twenty years, at an annual rental of not less than 50,000 dollars, and a revenue tax of 2 dollars upon each fur seal-skin taken during the continuance of the lease. These provisions impose a large measure of responsibility upon the Secretary, and the official record of legislative proceedings in the last preceding session of Congress indicates that it is the will of that body that such discretion should remain as originally provided in the Statute. The present lessees of the seal islands pay an annual rental of 55,000 dollars and a combined revenue tax and royalty of 2 dol. 62^ c. per skin, and an experience of twenty years has shown the capability of the leasing system, when faithfully administered, to respond to the various public interests concerned. ' EBH UUHMJW! 382 The Pribylov Islands are now the only important sources of supply for merchantable seal-skins. The herd which makes those islands its home is variously estimated to number from 4,000,000 to 6.000,000 seals, but the Treasury agents on duty at the islands have begun to note an apparent decrease in the number of seals resorting to the islands in the breeding season. It is much to be desired that any such decrease is but temporary, for should the Pribylov herd disappear, there is none to replace it. It is estimated that upwards of 300,000 seals were killed by unauthorized sealing-vessels during the breeding seasons of 1888 and 1889, and as tbe great majority of these were cows, there was an almost equal loss of pup seals. It is obvious that the herd must soon disappear under such a decimation of its productive members, even if the habitual use of fire-arms did not tend to drive the seals away from their haunts in advance of their extermination. The Act of the 2nd March, 1889, confers all the needed authority upon the Executive to protect the seals within the waters of the United States, but an appropriation is necessary to provide effective means for exercising that authority. There are not enough Revenue-cutters at the disposal of the Department to properly police the sealing-grounds during the dense fogs that prevail throughout the breeding season, and the great number of petty vessels engaged in marauding would render it impossible for their captors to furnish prize crews to take them all to Sitka for condemnation. The present state and prospects of the industry seem to call for prompt and energetic measures to preserve the valuable Pribylov herd from destruction or dispersion. It is suggested that a sufficient force of cruizing-vessels should be chartered, equipped, and manned, as auxiliary to such Revenue-vessels as could be spared from stations, and a dep6t for prisoners established at Ounalaska, whence they could be transferred to Sitka, and dealt with according to law It is believed that two or three seasons of energetic effort would break up the present destructive and threatening operations. No. 266. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received December 27.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, December 26, 1889, SEIZURES in Behring's Sea. Secretary of State has been at New York during past week. I renewed •discussion as to compensation this morning. He stated that he had decided to reply to the protest of Her Majesty's Government of October last, in order to place on record before the world the precise grounds on which his Government justify the seizures of our vessels, so that any compensation given may not be construed as an admission of wrong. He begged me to assure your Lordship that his reply would be sent in a few days, would not in any way embarrass the negotiations, and I will telegraph substance to your Lordship, and suspend further action pending its receipt. No. 267. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received January 6, 1890.) My Lord, Washington, December 1% 1889. I HAVE the honour to report that I called on Mr. Blaine this morning on his return from New York, where he has been during the past week, and renewed the discussion as to the question of compensation for the seizures in Behring's Sea. In the course of the conversation he informed me that, on further consideration, he had decided to reply to my protest in order to place on record before the world the precise grounds on which the United States' Government justify the seizure of the Canadian vessels, so that any compensation which may be granted may not be interpreted as an admission of wrong. He begged me, at the same time, to assure your Lordship that the proposed negotiations would not be embarrassed in any way by his reply, and that he would send it in a few days. I will telegraph the substance of his note to your Lordship as soon as I shall have received it, and I. propose to suspend further action pending its receipt. I have, &c. (Signed) J. PAUNCEFOTE. 383 No. 268. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received January 6, 1890.) My Lord, Washington, December 26, 1889. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith an extract from the " Washington Post," on the subject of an advertisement which has just been issued by the Secretary of the Treasury, inviting proposals for the privilege of taking fur-seals upon the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, for the term of twenty years from the 1st May next. As your Lordship will observe, the number of seals to be taken during the year ending May 1891 will be limited to 60,000, and for the succeeding years the number will be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury. I have &c. (Signed) I PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 268. Extract from the " Washington Post" of December 25, 1889. The Seae Island Contract.—Secretary Windom yesterday afternoon issued the following advertisement, inviting proposals for the privilege of taking fur-seals upon the Islands of St Paul and St. George, Alaska :— "The Secretary of the Treasury will receive proposals until 12 o'clock, noon, on the 23rd day of January, 1890, for the exclusive right to take fur-seals upon the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, for the term of twenty years from the 1st day of May, 1890, agreeably to the provisions of the Statutes of the United States. " In addition to the specific requirements of the said Statutes the successful bidder will be required to provide a suitable building for a public school on each island and to pay the expense of maintaining schools therein during a period of not less than eight months in each year, as may be required by the Secretary of the Treasury. "Also to pay to the inhabitants of said islands, for labour performed by them, such just and proper compensation as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Treasury. "The number of seals to be taken for their skins upon said islands during the year ending May 1891 will be limited to 60,000, and for the succeeding years the number will be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury in accordance with the provisious of law. " The right is reserved to reject any and all proposals not deemed to. be in accordance with the best interests of the United States, and of the inhabitants of said islands. "As a guarantee of good faith, each proposal must be accompanied by a properly certified cheque drawn on a United States' national bank." No. 269. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received January 10.) Sir, Downing Street, January 10, 1890. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 12th ultimo, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of three despatches from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding the claims for losses incurred by the seizure in Behring's Sea of the "Triumph," the "Lily," and the "Black Diamond." The claim in the case of the " Minnie " has not yet been received. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 269. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, December 16, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 26th August last,* in which 1 inclosed a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council detailing the circumstances attending the * See Inclosurj 1 in No. 222. nummiwmmammiam 384 warning-off from the Behring's Sea of the British sealing schooner " Triumph," I have the honour to forward herewith, for transmission to the United States' Government, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting formal statements and claim to compensation, on behalf of the owners, for loss incurred by reason of the said vessel being interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 269. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on November 16, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 11th November, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in connection with the warning-off from the Behring's Sea of the British sealing-schooner " Triumph," the circumstances attending which were detailed in the Minute of Council dated the 22nd August last, made upon a Report of the 13th August last of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, formal statements and claim to compensation on behalf of the owners, for loss incurred by reason of the said vessel being interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling. The Minister states that this claim amounts to 19,674 dollars, and is advanced by- Mr. E. Crow Baker, of Victoria, British Columbia, managing owner, on behalf of himself, Daniel McLean, Rosine Gibson, and John C. Blackett, as joint owners of the vessel in question. The Committee advise, on the recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute, together with the papers herewith annexed, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies for transmission to the Government of the United States. All which is respectfully submitted for vour Excellencv's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 269. Declaration of Edgar Crow Baker. City of Victoria, Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada. I, EDGAR CROW BAKER, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, retired Navigating Lieutenant, Royal Navy, but at present (among various other businesses) following the occupation or calling of a Real Estate and Financial Broker in the city aforesaid, and the duly authorized managing owner of the British sealing-schooner " Triumph," do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. That said schooner was built in April 1887 in Shelburne, Nova Scotia, purchased by myself and others, as per original register, and brought to the port of Victoria by one Daniel McLean, master and part owner, for the express purpose of engaging in the business of seal-hunting in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and elsewhere. 2. That said vessel was duly registered at the port of Victoria, British Columbia, by the usual method of transfer of registry, on the 2nd December, 1887, with the port number 11, her registered tonnage being 87"51, and her official number, 90,681. 3. That said vessel arrived at the port of Victoria on or about the 25th April, 1888, and after undergoing usual refit and outfit for her sealing voyage, cleared from the port of Victoria on or about the 5th May, 1888, for Behring's Sea, and prosecuted that branch of tbe deep-sea fisheries known as seal-hunting, in said arm of the North Pacific Ocean, with a crew composed principally of Indian hunters, and returned to Victoria, on or about the 12th September of said year with a catch of 2,491 sealskins, and the master reported no interference or molestation on the part of the United States' Revenue cruizers. 4. That said catch was sold in the market at Victoria for the price or sum of 14,2 i 9 dol. 75 e, and after reimbursing all expense of outfit for the hunting period, payment of hunters and crew, yielded a very handsome profit to the owners of said vessel for their season's venture. 5. That the price paid for skins during the season immediately above referred to 385 was 6 dollars only in Victoria, though 75 dol. 25 c. and 65 dol. 50 c. was obtained at the usual fall sales in London, Great Britain. 6. That the registered owners of said vessel at that time were: Edgar Crow Baker, 21 shares ; Walter E. Blackett, 21 shares; Daniel McLean, 22 shares, participating equally in the profits, and the vessel commanded by same master. 7. That in January of the present year (1889), in order to make the vessel as staunch and seaworthy as it was possible to make a vessel, not then two years old, she was docked in graving-dock at Esquimalt, and coppered to 9 feet forward and 11 feet aft, at an expense to the owners of 1,234 dol. 50 c, thereby enhancing" the value of said vessel from 8,250 dollars to very nearly 9,500 dollars. 8. That the primary object in sparing no expense to efficiently equip said vessel was that she might "keep the sea" in any weather, and prolong her seal-hunting voyage until the latest moment of the season, and return to her home-port in the following season with a catch in excess of that already quoted. 9. That the declarant sent said vessel down to San Francisco on the 24th March of the present year, in order to procure the best white hunters, sealing boats and sealing outfit obtainable, and disbursed for same and provisions 2,966 dol. 24 c. 10. That said vessel left San Francisco on or about the 12th April of the present year with a crew consisting of master, mate, carpenter, gunner, cook and steward, eight hunters, seventeen able and ordinary seamen, and two apprentices, in all thirty-two in number, as per certificate of shipping master of said port. 11. That said vessel entered and cleared from the port of Victoria on the 25th day of April last, and sent by the declarant on a sealing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea at a further cost to the owners of 2,975 dol. 19 c. for advances to hunters and crew, provisions, sails, equipments and apparel, marine insurance, and necessaries. 12. That the total amount of cash at risk in said venture, from commencement of voyage to finish on the 28th July, was 15,425 dol. 43 c., irrespective of the lay out or wages of master. 13. That the said schooner entered Behring's Sea on or about the 4th July, and having previously transhipped her outside, or coast catch, was hove to on the 11th July, and boarded by Lieutenant Tuttle, of the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush " (as per sworn-to testimony of the master, made on arriving in Victoria, dated the 8th August) who searched the vessel, examined and returned ship's papers, and ordered the schooner out of Behring's Sea, threatening confiscation of vessel and catch if caught in the act of killing seals, or with skins on board after having been warned. 14. That by reason of the threats and menaces of the said United States' cutter, the master was prevented from further prosecuting his legitimate business in said sea, and not wishing to incur the responsibility of threatened capture of his valuable vessel, returned to Victoria on the 28th July, with only seventy-two skins on board, and which were on board at the time of search, though undiscovered by the boarding officer, at least, so I am informed and verily believe. 15. That, from the number of skins taken by the "Triumph" last year, with vessel partially equipped only and with less experienced hunters, I conscientiously believe that the said schooner, in a full season unmolested and free from fear of molestation, would have taken in the neighbourhood of 2,500 skins. 16. That the market value of sealskins at the port of Victoria, on or about the 1st October instant, when in the usual course of events heretofore, the" Triumph" would have arrived after a complete season's voyage, as hereinbefore mentioned, was 8 dollars per skin. 17. That the declarant, on behalf of himself and co-owners, claims damages against the Government of the United States of America for the unlawful and unwarrantable interference, molestation, threat and menace of its said Revenue cutter, whereby a heavy loss is incurred by the owners and hunters of said schooner " Triumph," amounting to the value of the difference between the skins actually taken, and estimated catch, viz., 2,428 skins (2,500, less 72) at 8 dollars per skin, or the sum of 19,424 dollars, and 250 dollars for legal and other expenses in connection with the preparation and submission of this claim. 18. That hereto annexed, marked (A), is a statement in detail of such claim, and of the persons entitled to share therein. 19. That upon the sailing of the said schooner in April and May last at San Francisco and Victoria, respectively, advances were made to the hunters based upon a full season's catch, and said hunters will, upon payment of said claim, be entitled to, and will receive their share thereof. [128] 3 D ■aa i ■-■ 386 iiii I I p And I, Edgar Crow Baker, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, just and equitable, and by virtue of Act respecting Extra-Judicial Oaths. (Signed) EDGAR CROW BAKER, Managing Owner. Declared by the said Edgar Crow Baker, at the City of Victoria, British Columbia, the day of November, A.D. 1889. Before me, (Signed) D. R. Harris, A Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia, residing and practising at Victoria aforesaid. Inclosure 4 in No. 269. Detailed Statement of Claim by Owners of British schooner "Triumph" against the Government of the United States of America. 2,428 sealskins, balance of an estimated catch of 2,500 sealskins by the schooler "Triumph'' for the full season of 1889 in Behring's Sea, at 8 dollars per skin Legal and other expenses incidental to preparation and submission of claims .. Total .. .. .. .. .. .. Dollars. 19,424 250 19,674 Owners on October 1, Edgar Crow Baker, managing owner Daniel McLeau, master mariner .. Rogine Gibson, Bauie, Ontario John C. Blaekett, Victoria, British Columbia Total hares. 21 22 11 10 64 N.B.—E. Crow Baker, representing D. McLean's shares by full power of attorney, and as mortgagee in possession, J. C. Blaekett, by power of attorney, and Rosina Gibson's by consent of attorney. (Signed) EDWARD CROW BAKER, Managing Owner. The schedule marked (A) referred to in statement, of which this form part. (Signed) D. R. Harris, Notary Public for the Province of British Columbia. To all to whom these presents shall come be it known and made manifest that I, Alexander Roland Milne, a Surveyor in Her Majesty's Customs for the Port of Victoria, British Columbia, in the Dominion of Canada, duly appointed as such, residing and officiating in said capacity in the city of Victoria, in the Province aforesaid, do hereby certify that the paper written hereto annexed, dated the 8th August, 1889, signed and sworn to before George Morrison, J.P., on said day by one Daniel McLean, master of the British schooner " Triumph," registered at the port aforesaid and engaged in the sealing tmsiness, is as it purports to be a full, true and correct copy of the original thereof in every respect. I do further certify that the original document was forwarded by the Collector of Customs of this port to tbe Department of Marine and Fisheries at Ottawa on or about the date therein named, and that I have full confidence in the truth of the statements made by said master embodied in said affidavit. In testimony whereof I have hereunto set my hand and seal of office at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, this 4th day of November, 1889. (Signed) A. R. MILNE, Surveyor, 8fc. rasas* 387 Inclosure 5 in No. 269. ^Deposition of Daniel McLean. In the matter of search, &c, of the sealing schooner "Triumph" by the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush " in Behring's Sea. I, DANIEL McLEAN, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, being duly sworn, depose as follows:— That I am master and part owner of the British schooner " Triumph," registered at the Port of Victoria, British Columbia; that in conformity to the laws of the Dominion of Canada I regularly cleared the said schooner " Triumph" for a voyage to the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and that in pursuance of my legitimate business did enter the said Behring's Sea on the 4th day of July, 1889, and did "in a peaceful matinW proceed on my voyage and being in latitude 50° 5' north, longitude 171° 23' west, on the Uth day of July, 1880, at the hour of 8'30 a.m., was hailed by the Commander of the United States' Revenue cutter " Rush," the said Revenue cutter being a vessel belonging to the Government of the United States and regularly commissioned" by the same, a boat having been lowered by the officer and crew I was boarded by the same, the officer in charge of the boat being one Lieutenant Tuttle, who demanded the official papers of my vessel, and after reading the same proceeded to search my vessel for seals, and finding no evidence of the same informed me that orders have been issued by the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States under the Proclamation of the President, instructing the Commanding Officer of the said Revenue cutter " Rush " to seize all vessels found sealing in Behring's Sea; he also told me that should he again board me and find sealskins on board that he would seize and confiscate the vessel and catch ; he furthermore informed me that he had already seized the British schooner " Black Diamond," of Victoria, British Columbia, and that she had been sent to Sitka, and that, therefore, by reason of his threats and menaces I was caused to forego my legitimate and peaceful voyage on the high seas, and return "to the port of my departure, causing serious pecuniary loss to myself, crew, and owners, for which a claim will be formulated and forwarded in due Gourse.* And I make this solemn affidavit conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Oaths Ordinance, 1869. (Signed) DANIEL McLEAN, Master, Schooner " Triumph.*' Sworn before me this 8th August, 1889, at Victoria, British Columbia. (Signed) Geo. Morrison, J.P., a Justice of the Peace for the Province of British Columbia. I do hereby certify to the correctness of this statement as verbally expressed to me also by said Daniel McLean. (Signed) Eogar Crow Baker, Notary Public. Inclosure 6 in No. 269. Lord Stdnley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, December 17, 1889. WITH reference to my despatch of the 26th August last, relating to the seizure in Behring's Sea of the British schooner | Black Diamond," I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, submitting the claim to compensation of the owner of the vessel for loss sustained by reason of her seizure by the United States' authorities. 1 have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 7 in No. 269. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on December 2, 1889. ON a Report dated the 28th November, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries submitting, in connection with the seizure in the Behring's Sea of the British [128] 3 D 2 S5SH 388 WW- schooner " Black Diamond," the circumstances attending which were detailed in the Minute of Council approved by your Excellency on the 22nd August, 1889, formal statements and claim by the owner to compensation for loss incurred by reason of the seizure of said vessel, and the forcible removal to the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush " of seventy-six sealskins, as well as for the value of the estimated catch for the balance of the season had the vessel not been interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, which claim, with incidental expenses, aggregates the sum of 17,185 dollars. The Minister recommends that this claim be forwarded through the proper channel to Her Majesty's Government for transmission to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward copies hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 8 in No. 269. Declaration of Morris Moss. Canada, Province of British Columbia, City of Victoria. I, MORRIS MOSS, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, fur dealer and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. I am a British subject by birth, and the duly registered owner of the schooner "Black Diamond," of the port of Victoria, aforesaid. 2. On the 12th day of February, 1889, the said schooner was elcared at the. Customhouse at said city of Victoria for a fishing and hunting voyage to the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. 3. On the 3rd day of August, 1889, the said | Black Diamond " returned to Victoria aforesaid, and hereto annexed, marked (X), is the statutory declaration of Alexander Gault, the mate of the said schooner on said voyage, of the cause and manner of the " Black Diamond's " return to Victoria from such voyage, which said statement I verily believe is true. 4. The value of the sealskins taken from the " Black Diamond" as set out in said Alexander Gault's statement was, on or about the 1st day of October (when in due course the vessel would have delivered her cargo of skins at Victoria aforesaid), 8 dollars per skin. The salt so taken as aforesaid was worth 5 dollars. The Indian spears 4 dollars each, and the said rifle was worth 25 dollars. 5. From the actual catch of seals made in said sea during said season by other sailing vessels, I verily believe that had the said " Black Diamond " not been seized and her hunting voyage broken up as set out in said statement of Alexander Gault, the hunters on said schooner would have captured at least 2,100 sealskins in said Behring's Sea during the season of 1 b89. 6. I, for myself and the crew and hunters of the said "Black Diamond," claimed damages against the Government of the United States' of America for the seizure of the said "Black Diamond," and for the taking and detention of said seventy-six sealskins, and for 2,024 sealskins the balance of the estimated catch of 2,100 in Behring's Sea for the full season of 1889, also for the salt, rifle, Indian spears, and ship's papers taken as aforesaid, and for legal and other expenses incidental to, and arising out of^ such seizure, and the preparation and submission of this claim therefor and interest thereof at 7 per cent, per annum until paid. 7. Hereto annexed marked (A) is n Statement in detail of such claim for damages. And I, Morris Moss, make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same o be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting Voluntary and Extra-Judicial Oaths. (Signed) Declared by the said Morris Moss, at the city of Victoria, th< ..d. 1889. Before me, (Signed) Arthur L. Belyea, A Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for evince of British Columbia. MORRIS MOSS. 19th day of November, 389 Inclosure 9 in No. 269. (A.) Statement of Claim by Owner of schooner " Black Diamond" against the Government of the United States of America for Seizure in Behring's Sea on July 11, 1889. 76 sealskins (seized). 2,024 sealskins, balance of estimated catch by " Black Diamond " for full season of 1889 in Behring's Sea. Dollars. 2,100 sealskins, at 8 dollars .. .. .. .. .. 1 rifle, at 20 spears, at 4 dollars each.. .. .. 2 sacks salt, at 2 dol. 50 c. each .. .. Cost of obtaining new ship's papers .. .. .. Legal and other expenses arising out of, and incidental to, such seizure Total .. And interest thereon at 7 per cent, per annum until paid. (Signed) .. 17,185 MORRIS MOSS. This is the Statement referred to as marked (A) in the declaration of Morris Moss, taken before me the 19th November, 1889. (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. (X.) In the matter of the seizure of the sealing schooner " Black Diamond," by the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush," on the 11th day of July, a.d. 1889. I, Alexander Gault, of the city of Victoria, mate, do solemnly and sincerely declare that :— 1. I was at the time of the occurrences hereinafter mentioned, employed as mate of the sealing schooner " Black Diamond," of the port of Victoria, British Columbia. 2. On the 11th day of July last, whilst on board the said schooner she then being on. a sealing expedition, and in latitude 56° 22' north, and longitude 170° 25' west, and at a distance of about 35 miles from shore, we were overhauled by the "Richard Rush," a United States' Revenue cutter, which latter vessel having hailed us, and shouted a command we were unable to understand, steamed across our steamer's bows compelling us to come to. A boat was then lowered from the cutter, and Lieutenant Tuttle, with five other men came aboard the schooner. The captain of our schooner asked Lieutenant Tuttle what he wanted, and he replied he wished to see our papers. The captain then took him down into his cabin, and in my presence showed him the ship's papers. Lieutenant Tuttle then demanded that they should be handed to him, but our captain refused to give them up, and locked them in his locker. Lieutenant Tuttle then ordered his men to bring up the sealskins. At this time there were seventy-six salted and fifty- five unsalted sealskins on board. The Lieutenant then ordered the salted skins to be taken on board the " Richard Rush." This was done by the cutter's boat, two bags of salt and a rifle being also taken from the schooner to the cutter. Lieutenant Tuttle told our captain that if he did not give up the papers he should take them by force, and our captain still refusing, the Lieutenant hailed the cutter, and a boat brought off the Master-at-arms who came aboard our schooner. Lieutenant Tuttle asked our captain for his keys, but not being able to obtain them, ordered the Master-at- arms to force the locker. The master-at-arms then unscrewed the hinges of the locker, and taking out the papers, handed the same to Lieutenant Tuttle. Lieutenant Tuttle then went back to the "Richard Rush," but returned again, bringing with him one whose name I have since heard to be John Hawkinsen. The Lieutenant then ordered certain Indian sealing spears belonging to the schooner to the number of twenty to be placed in his boat, which was accordingly done by the cutter's men. Our captain asked him for a receipt for the skins, ship's papers, and other goods he had taken; this he refused to give. He then ordered our captain to take the schooner to Sitka, but our captain told him that if he wanted the schooner to go there he would have to put a crew on board to take her there. Lieutenant Tuttle then gave Hawkinsen some orders and some papers addressed to the United States' authorities at Sitka, and, leaving Hawkinsen on board the schooner, and taking the spears with him, returned to the cutter, which shortly afterwards steamed away, taking the ship's papers, the skins, and the other goods with her. 390 We set sail for Oonalaska where the captain hoped to fell in with a British man-of- war, and arrived at that place on the } 5th day of July. There being no man-of-war there, and the Indians having become very mutinous, and threatening to throw us overboard if they thought we were going to Sitka, we set sail for the port of Victoria, reaching the latter place on the 3rd day of August, 1889, at about the hour of 7 p.m. The man Hawkinsen, during the voyage, did not attempt to give any directions or suggestions as to the course to be taken by the schooner, and on arrival at Victoria was placed on shore by one of the schooner's boats. And I make this declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Oaths Ordinance, 1889. (Signed) ALEXANDER GAULT. Declared before me at the city of Victoria, this 8th day of August, 1889. (Signed) Ernest V. Bodwell, A Notary Public for the Province of British Columbia. This is the statutory declaration of Alexander Gault referred to as marked (X) in the declaration of Morris Moss made before me the 19th day of November, 1889. (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. .■ j Inclosure 10 in No. 269. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, December 17, 1889. WITH reference to the Deputy Governor's despatch of the 24th September last relating to the seizure in Behring's Sea of the British schooner " Lily," I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting formal statements and claim to compensation advanced by the owners of that vessel against the United States' Government for loss incurred by reason of her seizure. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON, Inclosure 11 in No. 269. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on December 2, 1889. ON a Report dated the 28th November, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in connection with the seizure in the Behring's Sea of the British schooner "Lily," the circumstances attending which were detailed in the Minute of Council approved by your Excellency on the 18th September, 1889," formal statements and claims by the owners to compensation for loss incurred by reason of the seizure of said vessel, and the forcible removal to the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush" of 383 sealskins, as well as for the value of the estimated catch for the balance of the season had the vessel not been interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, which claim, with incidental expenses, aggregates the sum of 17,167 dollars. The Minister recommends that this claim be forwarded through the proper channel to Her Majesty's Government for transmission to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward copies hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. J BOBBOBSSBBBam 391 Inclosure 12 in No. 269. Declaration of Morris Moss. Canada, Province of British Columbia, City of Victoria. I, MORRIS MOSS, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, fur dealer and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. I am a British subject by birth, and the duly registered owner of the schooner "Lily" of the port of Victoria aforesaid. 2. On the 20th day of May, a.d. 1889, the said schooner "Lily" cleared at the Customs-house, Victoria aforesaid, for a fishing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. 3. On the 1st day of September, a.d. 1889, the said schooner "Lily" returned to the said port of Victoria, and hereto annexed, marked (X), is the statutory declaration of John Reilly, the master of the said schooner " Lily " on said voyage, setting forth the cause and manner of the return to Victoria of said schooner from such voyage, which said statement I verily believe to be true. 4. The value of the sealskins taken from the said " Lily," as set out in said John Reilly's statement, was, on or about the 1st day of October (when in due course the said vessel would have delivered her cargo of skins at Victoria aforesaid), 8 dollars per skin. The salt so taken as aforesaid was worth 5 dollars, and the Indian spears 4 dollars each. 5. From the actual catch of seals made in said sea during said season by other vessels, I verily believe that had the said " Lily " not been seized, and her hunting voyage broken up, as set out in said statement of John Reilly, the said hunters on said schooner | lily " would have captured at least 2,100 sealskins in Behring's Sea during the season of 1889. 6. I for myself and the crew and hunters of the said " Lily " claim damages against the Government of the United States of America for the seizure of the said " Lily," and for the taking and detention of said 333 sealskins, and for 1,767 sealskins, the balance of the estimated catch of 2,100 in Behring's Sea for the full season of 1889; also for the. salt and Indian spears and ship's papers taken as aforesaid, and for legal and other expenses incidental to, and arising out of, such seizure, and the preparation and submission of this claim therefor and interest thereon, at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum until paid. 7. Hereto annexed, marked (A), is a statement in detail of such claim for damages. And I, Morris Moss, make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting Voluntary and Extra-Judicial Oaths. (Signed) MORRIS MOSS. Declared by the said Morris Moss at the citv of Victoria, the 19th day of November, A.D. 1889. Before me, (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia. 7m Inclosure 13 in No. 269. Statement of Claim. BY owner of schooner "Lily" against the Government of the United States of America for seizure in Behring's Sea on the 6th August, a.d. 1889. 333 sealskins (seined). 1,767 sealskins, balance of estimated catch by " Lily " for full season of 1889 in Behring's Sea. Dollars. 2,100 sealskins, at 8 dollars .. 24 Indian spears, at 4 dollars .. .. .. .. 2 sacks salt, at 2 dol. 50 c. Cost of obtaining new ship's papers.. .. .. .. Legal and other expenses arising out of, and incidental to, such seizure Total And interest thereon at 7 per cent, per annum until paid. (Signed) .. 17,176 MORRIS MOSS. >ij&.\jmiu!mmvm*mMsma!W!wm 392 This is the Statement of Claim referred to as marked (A) in the declaration of Morris Moss, made before me the 19th November, 1889. (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. In the matter of the seizure of the sealing schooner "Lily " by the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush," on the 6th day of August, a.d. 1889. I, John Reilly, of the city of Victoria, British Columbia, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare that:— 1. I am a master mariner, and was at the time of the occurrences hereinafter mentioned, and still am master of the schooner "Lily | of the Port of Victoria, British Columbia. 2. On the 6th dav of August, a.d. 1889, whilst I was on board and in command of the said schooner "Lily," and she being then on a sealing expedition, and being in latitude 55° 29' north, and longitude 166° 15' west, and at a distance of about 66 miles from the nearest land, the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush " overhauled the said schooner. 3. I was first boarded by the First Lieutenant, who was armed, and who asked me how many skins I had on board. I replied that he should find out himself, and said that if he wanted to see the schooner's papers I would show them to him and would render him assistance should he want to search the schooner for contraband goods,, but I would not acknowledge his right to seize me for sealing on the high seas. 4. The First Lieutenant then returned to the cutter, and in a short time returned accompanied by another boat of the cutter which was in charge of the Second Lieutenant. 5. They both came on board, and the First Lieutenant demanded of me the surrender of the schooner, and asking, at the same time, for the schooner's papers. This I at first declined to do, and the First Lieutenant said unless I gave the schooner's papers to him at' once he would take them by force. I then gave him the schooner's papers, consisting of registry, coasting licence, and clearance. 6. The First Lieutenant then ordered both boats' crew to search the schooner, and they took from my schooner 333 sealskins, all in good order. 7. He then asked me if I would give him two sacks of salt. I told him it would be useless for me to refuse, as he could take them by force, so I told him to go ahead and help himself. He then gave me two letters, the contents of which were unknown to me at the time, one of them being sealed, the contents of which is still unknown to me, the other certifying that he had seized the schooner " Lily " for violation of the United States' laws, and taken possession of schooner's papers. 8. He then told me to proceed to Sitka, Alaska. I asked him if he wanted me to go to Victoria or Sitka, Alaska, to which he replied that he had nothing to say but simply told me his orders. 9. My crew, at this time, consisted of a mate, George McDonald, and three white men, and twenty-five Indian hunters. The Indian hunters said that they would not proceed to Sitka, and to avoid further trouble 1 directed the schooner course to Victoria, and arrived here the 1st day of September at 7 o'clock p.m. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the Oaths Ordinance, 1889. (Signed) JOHN REILLY. Declared at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, this 11th day of September, 1889. Before me, (Signed) Thos. Shotbolt, Justice of the Peace. This is the statutory declaration of John Reilly, referred to as marked (X) in the declaration of Morris Moss, made before me the 19th November, 1889. (Signed) A. L. Belyea, Notary Public. No. 270. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received January 20.) Sir, Downing Street, January 18, 1890. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch and its inclosures from the Governor-General of KB 393 Canada, forwarding a claim for compensation from the owners of the schooner " Ariel" for loss incurred by reason of its being interfered with by the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush " while engaged in a sealing voyage in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. Inclosure 1 in No. 270. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, December 31, 1889. I HAVE the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council submitting a declaration and formal statement of claim to compensation on behalf of the owners of the British schooner " Ariel " for loss incurred by reason of the said vessel being interfered with by the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush " while engaged in a sealing voyage in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 270. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council, on December 28, 1889. ON a Report, dated the 27th December, 1S89, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries submitting the appended declaration and formal statement of claim to compensation on behalf of the owners of the British schooner | Ariel," which vessel was, on the the 30th day of July, 1889, while engaged in a sealing voyage in the Behring's Sea (so called) boarded by three officers from the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush." The officer searched and examined the schooner | Ariel," and questioned the master as to his voyage, crew, and catch; and also warned him against taking seals in the Behring's Sea under threat of seizure of the vessel and the arrest of himself and mate. The Minister observes that the claim amounts to 9,498 dollars for loss incurred by reason of the said vessel being interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, and is advanced by Mr. Samuel W. Bucknam, of Victoria, British Columbia, managing owner and master of the said schooner " Ariel," on behalf of himself and Messrs. John M. Taylor and Bela R. Lawrence, of the city of St. John, New Brunswick, as joint owners of the vessel in question. The Minister recommends that this claim be forwarded through the proper channel to Her Majesty's Government for transmission to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, together with the papers mentioned herein. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 270. Declaration of Samuel W. Bucknam. Canada, Province of British Columbia, City of Victoria. I, SAMUEL W. BUCKNAM, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, and Dominion of Canada, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:—- 1. The hereinafter-mentioned schoone'r " Ariel" is a British vessel registered at the port of St. John, in the province of New Brunswick, one of the provinces of the Dominion of Canada. 2. The registered owners of the said schooner " Ariel | are John M. Taylor and [128] 3 E 394 Bela R. Lawrence, both of the city of St. John aforesaid, who each own twenty-four shares thereof, and myself, who dwn the remaining sixteen shares thereof. 3. I am the managiag owner and master of the said schooner " Ariel." 4. On the 9th day of February, 1889, A.D., I cleared the said schooner " Ariel" at the Gustoms at the said port of Victoria for a fishing and seal-hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and on the 11th day of said month sailed from 6aid port of Victoria on such voyage. 5. On and for said voyage I was master of said " Ariel" and one Herman Smith was mate, and said " Ariel" on said voyage carried a crew of twenty-two men all told. The said schooner " Ariel " was equipped and provisioned for a full season's voyage. 6. On the 12th day of July following, the "Ariel" entered Behring's Sea. The sealskins which had been taken by the hunters on said schooner in the North Pacific Ocean had been shipped to Victoria before entering Behring's Sea, and no skins were on board on said 12th July. 7. The hunters on the " Ariel" began sealing on the 14th day of said July, and in the sixteen days following captured about 400 sealskins. 8. On the 30th day of said month of July, at about 6 o'clock in the morning, the United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush " came alongside the "Ariel" and three officers from said " Richard Rush " boarded the " Ariel." The said officers examined and searched the "Ariel," asked the number of my crew, when I entered the sea, and how many sealskins I had on board, and warned and threatened me that if I was caught taking seals, or with fresh sealskins on board, the "Ariel" would be seized, and myself and mate placed under arrest. The said officers also told me that they had seized the schooners " Pathfinder," " Black Diamond," and " Minnie," and searched other vessels in the sea. The officers then left, and shortly after the cutter sailed away. 9. Fearing to remain in Behring's Sea lest I should lose my vessel and be myself put in prison, 1 at once sailed for one of the passes leading from the sea* On the 31st day of July I lost a boat with three men^ and remained some days* in the immediate vicinity in order to pick them up. On the 21st August the "Ariel" sailed out of Behring's Sea, homeward bound, with 844 sealskins on boards On the 2nd day of September the " Ariel" arrived at Victoria aforesaid, fully one month earlioT than the usual time of arrival for sealers from Behring's Sea. 10. From the actual number of seals captured by the " Ariel** before being boarded as aforesaid and from the number actually captured by other sealing! Vessels, with about the same equipment of boats and men as the "Ariel," I believe that had the " Ariel" not been molested in Behring's Sea (and but for such boarding and threatening as aforesaid she certyinly would have remained the full season) the said " Ariel " would have made a total catch of not less 2,000 sealskins. 11. The selling price of sealskins at said Victoria on the said arrival of the " Ariel" and on the 1st October, about which time sealing vessels Usually arrive at Vietoria from a full season's voyage, was 8 dollars per skin. 12. I for myself, the said John M. Taylor, and the said Bella R. Lawrence, my co-owners in said schooner " Ariel," and likewise for the crew of the said " Ariel" on said voyage who were and are entitled to share in the total catch of sealskins by said vessel for the full season aforesaid, claim damages of and from the Government of the United States of America for the illegal boarding as aforesaid of the said schooner, and for having by threats and intimidation broken up the voyage of said schooner " Ariel" and thereby caused the loss of at least 1,156 sealskins to the said vessel, her owners, and crew, and for legal and other expenses incidental to the preparation and submission of this claim. 13. Hereto annexed, marked (A), is a statement of such claim for damages as aforesaid. And I, Samuel W. Bucknam aforesaid, make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the "Act respecting voluntary and extra-judicial oaths." (Signed) SAMUEL W. BUCKNAM. Signed and declared by the said Samuel W. Bucknam the 29th day of November, A.D. 1889. Before me, (Signed) Arthur L. BblyeA, A Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia. 395 Inclosure 4 in No. 270. Statement of claim against the United States of America re boarding and threats to seize the schooner " Ariel" in Behring's Sea, July 30, 1889 :— 2,000 sealskins estimated catch for full season. Dollars. 844 „ number actually taken. 1=156 „ balance of estimated catch, claimed ill damages at 8 dollars .. 9,248 Legal and other expenses incidental to the making and submission of this claim ■.■'. .. '.. .. .. U .. .. 250 Total And interest thereon at the rate of 7 per cent, per annum until paid. 9,498 This is the Statement of claim referred to in the declaration of Samuel W. Bucknam, made before me the 29th November, a.d. 1889. (Signed) A. L. BELYEA, Notary Public. No. 271. Sir J, Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received January 22.) My Lord, Washington, January 9, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 26th ultimo, I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of a Resolution which has been laid upon the table of the Senate by Senator Plumb in regard to the advertisement of the Secretary of the Treasury, inviting tenders for a new lease of the Alaska seal fisheries. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. :•. Inclosure in No. 271. Extract from the f( Congressional Record" of January 7, 1890. Alaska Seal Fisheries. Mr. Plumb.—I offer a Resolution, which I ask may lie upon the table, and be printed. The Vice-President.—The Resolution will be read. The Chief Clerk read as follows:— " Whereas the Secretary of the Treasury has, by public advertisement, invited bids for leasing the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, in the Territory of Alaska, for a period of twenty years ; and | Whereas the law under which said proposal is issued was passed about twenty years since, and the circumstances and conditions existing in Alaska, and with reference to the seal industry, have materially changed during that period; and 1 Whereas it has been charged upon the authority of a late Governor of Alaska that the Alaska Commercial Company, now occupying said islands under lease from the Government, has exercised its privileges oppressively and against the interests' of both the natives and the Government; and 1 Whereas said Company claims that it is the only person or organization which can successfully compete for the lease invited by the Secretary of the Treasury as aforesaid, and there is every reason to believe that under present legislation and conditions the lease proposed will be made to said Alaska Commercial Company substantially without competition. Therefore, " Resolved,—That the Secretary of the Treasury be requested not to make a new lease of said islands until further action by Congress, or until the latest period made necessary by existing law, and that meanwhile he make full report to the Senate as to the manner in which the said Alaska Commercial Company has discharged its duties and obligations under the present lease, and also what additional legislation, if any, is necessary in order that the interests of the Government and those of the natives and citizens of Alaska may be more fully protected." The Vice-President.—The Resolution will lie on the table and be printed. [128] 3 E 2 396 I No. 272. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, January 23.) My Lord, . Washington, January 23, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith copy of a note which I have received from Mr. Blaine, containing the answer of the United States' Government to the protest which Mr. Edwardes made by your Lordship's directions on the 12tb October last against the seizure of Canadian vessels made by the United States' Eevenue cutter "Rush" in Behring's Sea. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 272. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Department of State, Washington, January 22, 1890. SEVERAL weeks have elapsed since I had the honour to receive through the hands of Mr. Edwardes copies of two despatches from Lord Salisbury,* complaining of tbe course of the United States' Revenue cutter " Rush" in intercepting Canadian vessels sailing under the British flag, and engaged in taking fur seals in the waters of the Behring's Sea. Subjects which could not be postponed have engaged the attention of this Department, and have rendered it impossible to give a formal answer to Lord Salisbury until the present time, In the opinion of the President, the Canadian vessels, arrested and detained in the Behring's Sea, were engaged in a pursuit that is in itself contra bonos mores—a pursuit which of necessity involves a serious and permanent injury to the rights of the Government and people of the United States. To establish this ground, it is not necessary to argue the question of the extent and nature of the sovereignty of this Government over the waters of the Behring's Sea; it is not necessary to explain, certainly not to define, the powers and privileges ceded by His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia in the Treaty by which the Alaskan territory was transferred to the United States. The weighty considerations growing out of the acquisition of that territory, with all the rights on land and sea inseparably connected therewith, may be safely left out of view while the grounds are set forth upon which this Government rests its justification for the action complained of by Her Majesty's Government. It cannot be unknown to Her Majesty's Government that one of the most valuable sources of revenue from the Alaskan possessions is the fur-seal fisheries of the Behring's Sea. These fisheries had been exclusively controlled by the Government of Russia, without interference and without question, from their original discovery until the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867. From 1867 to 1886 the possession, in which Russia had been undisturbed, was enjoyed by this Government also. There was no interruption and no intrusion from any source. Vessels from other nations passing from time to time through Behring's Sea to the Arctic Ocean in pursuit of whales had always abstained from taking part in the capture of seals. This uniform avoidance of all attempts to take fur seal in those waters had been a constant recognition of the right held and exercised first by Russia, and subsequently by this Government. It has also been the recognition of a fact now held beyond denial or doubt, that the taking fit seals in the open sea rapidly leads to their extinction. This is not only the well-known opinion of experts, both British and American, based upon prolonged observation and investigation, but the fact had also been demonstrated in a wide sense by the well-nigh total destruction of all seal fisheries except the one in the Behring's Sea which the Government of the United States is now striving to preserve, not altogether for the use of the American people, but for the use of the world at large. The killing of seals in the open sea involves the destruction of the female in common with the male. The slaughter of a female seal is reckoned as an immediate loss of three seals, besides the future loss of the whole number which the bearing seal may produce in the successive years of life. The destruction which results from killing seals in the open sea proceeds, therefore, by a ratio which constantly and rapidly See Nos. 228 and 229. 397- increases, and insures the total extermination of the species within a very brief period. It has thus become known that the only proper time for the slaughter of seals is at the season when they betake themselves to the land, because the land is the only place where the necessary discrimination can be made as to the age and sex of the seal. It would seem then, by fair reasoning, that nations not possessing the territory upon which seals can increase their numbers by natural growth, and thus afford an annual supply of skins for the use of mankind, should refrain from the slaughter in open sea, where the destruction of the species is sure and swift. After the acquisition of Alaska, the Government of the United States, through competent agents, working under the direction of the best experts, gave careful attention to the improvement of the seal fisheries. Proceeding by a close obedience to the laws of nature, and rigidly limiting the number to be annually slaughtered, the Government succeeded in increasing the total number of seals, and adding correspondingly and largely to the value of the fisheries. In the course of a few years of intelligent and interesting experiment, the number that could be safely slaughtered was fixed at 100,000 annually. The Company to which the administration of the fisheries was intrusted by a lease from this Government has paid a rental of 50,000 dollars per annum, and, in addition thereto, 2 dol. 62^ c. per skin for the total number taken. The skins were regularly transported to London to be dressed and prepared for the markets of the world, and the business had grown so large that the earnings of English labourers, since Alaska was transferred to the United States, amounts in the aggregate to more than 12,000,000 dollars. The entire business was thus conducted peacefully, lawfully, and profitably; profitably to the United States, for the rental was yielding a moderate interest on the large sum which this Government had paid for Alaska, including the rights now at issue; profitably to the Alaskan Company, which, under Governmental direction and restriction, had given unwearied pains to the care and development of the fisheries; profitably to the Aleuts, who were receiving a fair pecuniary reward for their labours, and were elevated from semi-savagery to civilization, and to the enjoyment of schools and churches provided for their benefit by the Government of the United States; and, last of all, profitably to a large body of English labourers who had constant employment and received good wages. This, in brief, was the condition of the Alaska fur-seal fisheries down to the year 1886. The precedents, customs, and rights had been established and enjoyed either by Russia or the United States for nearly a century. The two nations were the only Powers that owned a foot of land on the continents that bordered, or on the islands included within, the Behring's waters where the seals resort to breed. Into this peaceful and secluded field of labour, whose benefits were so equitably shared by the native Aleuts of the Pribyloff Islands, by the United States, and by England, certain Canadian vessels in 1886 asserted their right to enter and, by their ruthless course, to destroy the fisheries, and with them to destroy also the resulting industries which are so valuable. The Government of the United States at once proceeded to check this movement, which, unchecked, was sure to do great and irreparable harm. It was cause of unfeigned surprise to the United States that Her Majesty's Government should immediately interfere to defend and encourage (surely to encourage by defending) the course of the Canadians in disturbing an industry which had been carefully developed for more than ninety years under the flags of Russia and the United States, developed in such manner as not to interfere with the public rights or the private industries of any other people or any other person. Whence did the ships of Canada derive the right to do in 1886 that which they had refrained from doing for more than ninety years ? Upon what grounds did Her Majesty's Government defend in the year 1886 a course of conduct in the Behring's Sea which she had carefully avoided ever since the discovery of that sea ] By what reasoning did Her Majesty's Government conclude that an act may be committed with impunity against the rights of the United States which had never been attempted against the same rights when held by the Russian Empire ? So great has been the injury to the fisheries from the irregular and destructive slaughter of seals in the open waters of the Behring's Sea by Canadian vessels, that whereas the Government has allowed 100,000 to be taken annually for a series of years, it is now compelled to reduce the number to 60,000. If four years of this violation of natural law and neighbour's rights has reduced the annual slaughter of seal by 40 per cent., it is easy to see how short a period will be required to work the total destruction of the fisheries. The ground upon which Her Majesty's Government justifies, or at least defends, EUMe%MP«J4UM HgiBieHm 398 the course of the Canadian vessels, rests upon the fact that they are committing their acts of destruction on the high seas, viz., more than 3 marine miles from the shore-line It is doubtful whether Her Majesty's Government would abide by this rule if the attempt were made to interfere with the pearl fisheries of Ceylon, which extend 20 miles from the shore-line, and have been enjoyed by England without molestation ever since their acquisition. England has felt authorized to sell the fishery rights from year to year. Nor is it credible that modes of fishing on the Grand Banks, altogether practicable but highly destructive, would be justified or even permitted by Great Britain on the plea that the vicious acts were committed more than 8 miles from shore. There are, according to scientific authority, " great colonies of fish on the New* foundland banks. These colonies resemble the seats of great populations on land. They remain stationary, having a limited range of water in which to live and die." In these great " colonies," it is according to expert judgment comparatively easy to | explode dynamite or giant powder in such manner as to kill vast quantities of fish, and at the same time destroy countless numbers of eggs. Stringent laws have been necessary to prevent the taking of fish by the use of dynamite in many of the rivers and lakes of the United States. The same mode of fishing could readily be adopted with effect on the more shallow parts of the banks, but the destruction of fish in proportion to the " catch," says a high authority, might be as great as 10,000 to 1. Would Her Majesty's Government think that so wicked an act could not be prevented, and its perpetrators punished, simply because it had been committed outside of the 8-mile line? Why are not the two cases parallel ? The Canadian vessels are engaged in the taking of fur seal in a manner that destroys the power of reproduction, and insures the extermination of the species. In exterminating the species an article useful to mankind is totally destroyed, in order that temporary and immoral gain may be acquired by a few persons. By the employment of dynamite on the banks, it is not probable that the total destruction of fish could be accomplished, but a serious diminution of a valuable food for man might assuredly result, Does Her Majesty's Government seriously maintain that the law of nations is powerless to prevent such violation of the common rights of man ? Are the supporters of justice in all nations to be declared incompetent to prevent wrongs so odious and so destructive ? In the judgment of this Government, the law of the sea is not lawlessness. Nor can the law of the sea and the liberty which it confers and which it protects be perverted to justify acts which are immoral in themselves, which inevitably tend to results against the interest and against the welfare of mankind. One step beyond that which Her Majesty's Government has taken in this contention and piracy finds its justification. The President does not conceive it possible that Her Majesty's Government could, in fact, be less indifferent to these evil results than is the Government of the United States. But he hopes that Her Majecty's Government will, after this frank expression of views, more readily comprehend the position of the G overnment of the United States touching this serious question. This Government has been ready to concede much in order to adjust all differences of view, and has in the judgment of the President already proposed a solution not only equitable, but generous. Thus far, Her Majesty's Government has declined to accept the proposal of the United States. The President now awaits with deep interest, not unmixed with solicitude, any proposition for reasonable adjustment which Her Majesty's Government may submit. The forcible resistance to which this Government is constrained in the Behring's Sea is, in the President's judgment, demanded not only by the necessity of defending the traditional and long-established rights of the United States, but also the rights of good morals and of good government the world over. In this contention, the Government of the United States has no occasion and no desire to withdraw or modify the positions which it has at any time maintained against the claims of the Imperial Government of Russia. The United States will not withhold from any nation the privileges which it demanded for itself when Alaska was part of the Russian Empire. Nor is the Government of the United States disposed to exercise in those possessions any less power or authority than it was willing to concede to the Imperial Government of Russia when its sovereignty extended over them. The President is persuaded that all friendly nations will concede to the United States the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. j rMHimiVT — 399 No. 273. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign. Office, January 28, 1890* I HAVE received your telegram of the 23rd instant, giving the substance of a note you had received from Mr. Blaine, in reply to the proposals made to the Government of the United States for the reopening of negotiations on the Behring's Sea question Her Majesty's Government will be prepared, when the text of the note reaches them, to give it their careful consideration, and to return a formal reply. So far as they are at present able to judge, it lays down doctrines in international law to which they would be unable to subscribe. Meanwhile, they would be glad to know whether, in your opinion, it would be desirable that, in reply to Mr. Blaine's assurance that "the Government of the United States await with deep interest, not unmixed with anxiety,- any suggestion' for a reasonable adjustment of the points at issue between the two Governments," you should now make proposals in the sense explained in you? despatch of the 1st November last, with the modifications which, after consultation with the Colonial Office, have been considered necessary. The following are the terms which Her Majesty's Government would be prepared to authorize you to propose to Mr. Blaine:— (a.) That the tripartite negotiation for securing a close time in Behfifl* s Sea for the protection of the fur-seals should be resumed at Washington1. (6.) That all well-founded claims for Compensation on the part of British subjects for seizures in the past of their vessels by authorities of the United States should be dealt with by a separate negotiation as speedily ag possible, but that it should be understood that Her Majesty's Government must be Satisfied Oil this point before they Can come to any settlement in regard to a close season. (c.) Lastly, that an assurance should be obtained from the Government of the United States that there shall be no further seizures of British ships in Behring's Sea while negotiations are proceeding. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY, No. 274. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, January 30.) My Lord, Washington, January 30, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inform your Lordship that I think it is important that I should know the total amount of compensation which is claimed for the seizures of British vessels in Behring's Sea up to date before making the proposals indicated in your Lordship's telegram of the 2Sth instant. I have told Mr. Blaine that Her Majesty's Government must have satisfaction ©n this point before they can agree to any settlement on the other question. Arguing from his stand-point he denies any right of compensation, but he is4 willing, for thp sake of settling so grave a dispute, to consult tbe President of the United States as to a gratuitous offer of a lump sum in full satisfaction, in order that diso&ssions en items involving principles on which the views of the two Governments appear irreconcilable may be avoided. He has, therefore, asked me to obtain the above information as soon as possible. If this difficulty be surmounted, negotiations for a close season might be commefiGSd at once, subject to adequate assurances against further seizures, whieh, I think, I might be able to obtain. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNOEJIOTE. 400 ill No. 275. I Ii IB! K Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 1.) Sir, Downing Street, January 31, 1890. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding a claim to compensation on behalf of the owner of the British schooner " Kate," which vessel was ordered from the Behring's Sea in August last by an officer of the United States' Revenue-cutter "Richard Rush." I am to add that this claim had not previously been received, and Lord Knutsford has inquired, by telegraph, whether any further claims are to be expected. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 275. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, January 6, 1890. I HAVE the honour to forward herewith, for transmission to the United States' Government, a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council submitting declarations and formal statement of the claim to compensation on behalf of the owner of the British schooner " Kate," which vessel was on the 13th August last, while engaged on a sealing voyage, ordered from the Behring's Sea, under threat of seizure, by an officer of the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush." Tour Lordship will observe that the claim amounts to the sum of 11,210 dollars for loss incurred by reason of the said vessel being interferred with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, and is advanced by Mr. Charles Spring, of Victoria, British Columbia, as sole owner of the vessel in question. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 275. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 28th December, 1889. ON a Report, dated 27th December, 1889, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting the appended declarations and formal statement of the claim to compensation on behalf of the owner of the British schooner " Kate," which vessel was on the 13th August, 1889, while engaged on a sealing voyage, ordered from the Behring's Sea (so-called) under threat of seizure by an officer of the United States' Revenue-cutter " Richard Rush." The Minister observes that the claim amounts to 11,210 dollars for loss incurred by reason of the said vessel being interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, and is advanced by Mr. Charles Spring, of Victoria, British Columbia, as sole owner of the schooner in question. The Minister recommends that this claim be forwarded through the proper channel to Her Majesty's Government for transmission to the Government of the United States. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute, together with the papers mentioned herein, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. All of which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. 481* itppendit. Canada, Prbvmce of BrM§h Columbia, City of Victoria. I, Neils Mqsl^oi^the cifcjK °f Victpim, province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, master mariner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. The hereinafter mentioned schooner "Kate" is a British vessel, registered at the port of Vj^fcpria, Britjgh. Columbia, and owned by Charles. Srafins, of the same place. 2. On or about the 1st June, 1889, I cleared the sajd, .schooner "Kate," as master thereof, at the Customs-house, ppi$ of Victoria, for a fishing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea. .On the following day the | Kate" sailed on said voyage, fully equipped and provisioned for a whole season's voyage, and-carrying-screw of four men. 3. On the westjjpast of Vancouver Island I engaged and took on board sixteen Indian hunters and sailed northward, entering Behring's Sea on or about the 20th July following, having then on board twenty-four seal-skins caught outside Behring's Sea. 4. A few days after entering the Sea the hunters began taking seals, and continued to do so up to the 13th August following, on which day the "Kate" had on hoard 630 seal-skins. 5. On said 13th August, at about 6 o'clock in the evening, the United States' Revenue- cutter "Rtehard Rush" steamed up to the "Kate," within hailing distance, and an officer asked me what I was doins:. I replied that I was fishing. He said that he had orders to order all schooners out of Behring's Sea if caught sealing, and if he saw me again in the Sea he would seize me. The wind was blowing a gale at the time, and the cmSer steamed away. 6. In consequence, of what had been said to me by the officer of the said cutter I at once determined to leave the Sea and not risk seizure, and on the 16th day of the said month of August the " Kate " galled out of Behring's Sea by the Ounimak Pass, and sailing south reached Victoria about the 10th September, after some days' delay on the west coast of Vancouver Island. 7. Before being spoken by the said cutter, my intention was to remain in Behring's Sea until the 1st September, and wi$h the hunters I had and average weather I verily believe that by the 1st September, had not the " Kate " been ordered to leave the Sea and threatened withi seizure if seen again by the said cutter, the said " Kate " would hayg; made a total catch of not less than 2,000: seaj-sjyng. The best part of the seeing season in the said Sea was about beginning, and in the three days just preceding the said 13th August the hunters on the " Kate " brought in about 300 seal-skins. I, Neils Moss, aforesaid, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the "Act respecting extra-judicial oaths." (Signed) NEILS MOSS. .Signed and declared by the said Neils Moss, the 7th day of December, a.d. 1889'j before me. (Signed) Arthtje L. Belyea, Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia. Canada, Province of British Columbia, Victoria. I, Charles Spring, of the city of Victoria, province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, trader and ship-owner, do solemnly and sincerely declare as follows:— 1. I am the sole owner of the schooner "Kate," of the port of Victoria, aforesaid. 2. I have read the declaration of Neils Moss, the master of said schooner on a sealing voyage to the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea in 1889, and verily believe the same to be true. 3. The market value of seal-skins at Victoria, aforesaid, at or about the time the "Kate" arrived from said voyage and since that time, was, and now is, 8 dollars per skin. 4. I, on my own behalf and on behalf of the crew of said schooner, claim damages of and from the Government of the United States of America for having, by force of threats_and_intimidation, compelled the master of said schooner on said voyage to leave Behring's Sea before the close of the sealing season, and thus depriving the crew and owner of said vessel of the benefits and profits of a full season's catch of seal-skins. [128] 3 F ■0HB « 402 I also claim compensation for legal, personal;, and other expenses in connection with the preparation and submission of this claim for damages, and hereto annexed marked (A) • is a statement in detail of such claim. And I, Charles Spring, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the " Act respecting extra-judicial oaths." (Signed) C. SPRING. Signed and declared by the said Charles Spring, the 13th day of December, a.d. 1889; before me. (Signed) Arthur L. Belyea, A Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia. Statement of Claim by Owner of schooner " Kate." 2,000 seal-skins, estimated catch by "Kate" for full season of 1889 in . Behring's Sea. 630 less number taken up to 13th August, 1889. 1,370 balance, at 8 dollars per skin .. .. .. ., .. Legal and other expenses in preparation and submission of this claim.. Total Dollars. 10,960 250 11,210 And interest thereon at 7 per cent, until paid. This is the statement (A) of claim referred to in the declaration of Charles Spring, made before me the 13th day of December, 1889. (Signed) A. L. BELYEA, Notary Public. No. 276. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—^-(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, February 1, 1890. I HAVE to acknowledge the receipt of your telegram of the 30th ultimo, asking to be informed what is the total amount of the compensation claimed on account of the British vessels seized up to date by the United States' authorities in Behring's Sea. You are authorized to inform Mr. Blaine that the claims which have been presented to Her Majesty's Government amount to about 500,000 dollars. |y; Her Majesty's Government would, of course, be willing to subject them to further- examination, and probably considerable reductions would be found to be admissible. Should differences of opinion arise as to the amounts to be awarded in the several cases, Her Majesty's Government might not be indisposed to agree that they should be referred to arbitration. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 277. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, February 1, 1890. I HAVE to inform you that the claims for compensation for the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea, submitted by the Canadian Government, have been revised at the Colonial Office, and should not exceed 400,000 dollars. A summary of the various claims will be sent to you by mail this evening. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. 403 No. 278. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. 'Sir, Foreign Office, February 6, 1890. I AM directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state that his Lordship would be glad to be favoured with any observations which Lord Knutsford may have to offer on the reply of the United States' Government to the protest of Her Majesty's Government against the seizures of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea by the United States' authorities.* I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 279. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 7.) Sir, Downing Street, February 6, 1890. WITH reference to the last paragraph of the letter from this Department of the 31st ultimo, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of telegraphic correspondence with the Governor- General of Canada respecting the claims on account of the seizures made by the United States' Revenue cruizers in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) ROBERT G. W. HERBERT. Inclosure 1 in No. 279. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston. (Telegraphic) Downing Street, January 30, 1890. I SHOULD be glad to know if there are any further claims for compensation Behring's Sea, and what they amount to. Inclosure 2 in No. 279. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) (Received at the Colonial Office, February 4, 1890.) THERE is one additional claim for compensation " Minnie," 16,460 dollars. I am sending summary of claims by post, and have forwarded a copy to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington for his information. No. 280. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, February 8.) My Lord, Washington, February 7, 1890. THE terrible calamity which has befallen the family of the Secretary of the Navys and the renewed affliction in the family of the Secretary of State, both of which events I had the honour to report to your Lordship by telegram, have delayed the further progress of the negotiations respecting the Behring's Sea question. But as soon as was practicable after the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 1st instant I had an interview with Mr. Blaine and resumed the discussion on the subject of damages for the seizure of the Canadian vessels. I informed him of the amount of the claims, at which he appeared quite astounded. After some general conversation as to the nature and character of the damages claimed, .Mr. Blaine said that, viewing the case as he did from the standpoint taken in his reply [128] * See No. 272. 3 F 2 404 II MS to the protest of Her Majesty's Government against the seizure of the vessels in question, he could never admit that his Government were justly liahle to pay any damages at all. But he was willing to examine and assess the damages with me on the same principle as if the liability of his Government were admitted, and then to refer the qusgtion of liability to some eminent jurisconsult for decision, on written statements and answers submitted by the two Governments respectively. I objected that the whole Behring's Sea controversy would be raised in such an arbitration, which it appeared to me would of necessifcgr involve grave questions of international law more fitting for solution by an areopagus of the Great Powers. Mr. Blaine dissented from this view, urging that, as his Government had asserted no claim to the Behring's Sea as a mare clausum, no established principles of international law would be in dispute. The Arbitrator would only have to find whether, under the circumstances, the United States' Government ought to pay damages for the seizures. If he found in the affirmative, the damages previously assessed would be paid. I observed that, apart from other objections, it seemed to me premature to talk of arbitration; and I reminded him that at our first interview (reported in my despatch No. 190 of the 1st November, 1889) he expresssed the opinion that, if an arrangement in regard to a close time should be arrived at, his Government would not wish that private individuals who had acted bond fide in the belief that they were exeroising their lawful rights, should be the victims of a grave dispute between two great countries which had happily been adjusted. I inquired why he was no longer disposed to adopt this friendly and equitable mode of treating the question. Mr. Blaine replied that he was not aware, at that time, of the magnitude of the claims. He now learned for the first time that they were actually computed at nearly 500,000 dollars. Making all allowances for exaggerated demands, the claim was still too large to be dealt with in any other way than by an appropriation vote of Congress, and his Government were not prepared to propose a vote of such an amount unless the liability of the United States' Government had been previously established by the award of an arbitrator. If Her Majesty's Government were disposed to agree to an arbitration such as he had indicated he was quite willing to resume at once here the tripartite negotiation for a close time commenced in London, and concurrently to proceed with the necessary steps for the settlement of the question of damages. I reolied that at present my instructions were that Her Majesty's Government wp$W come to no agreement for a close time unless they obtained satisfaction in the matter of damages, and that I thought they would only accept arbitration on the question of amount. But I promised Mr. Blaine to communicate his proposals to your Lordship without delay, and I have accordingly done so by telegram. I have, &c. ("Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 281. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, February 8.) (Extract.) Washington, February 8, 1890. WITH reference to my telegram of yesterday's date, I have the honour to inquire whether your Lordship would see any objection to the tripartite negotiation for a close time for seals in Behring's Sea, and the assessment of damages for the seizunes of Canadian vessels, being commenced at once, leaving the question of arbitration in suspense until the results of both proceedings are known. No. 282. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, February 10, 1890. "WITH reference to my letter of the 3rd instant, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit herewith, to be laid before Secretary Lord Knutsford, a copy of a 405 telegram^fjrpm Sir J. Pauncefote,* stating that he has communicated the amount of tfte^pehring's Sea claims to Mr. Blaine, who proposes to assess then? m^si^l^,J«^ mm to jrefer the questiqii of the liability of-"line United States' Goveram^at^ aMtrlition. I am to state that Lord Salisbury proposes, with Lord Knutsford's concurrence, to authorize Sir J. Pauncefote to commence at once the tripartite negotiations and the assessment of damages, leaving the question of arbitration in suspense until the results of both proceedings are known. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 283. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, February 10, 1890. I HAVE received your telegram of the 8th instant, stating that you have communicated to Mr. Blaine the amount claimed on account of the seizures of Canadian vessels, and that his Excellency states that such a sum could only be paid on the award of an arbitration, followed by a vote of Congress. You add that he is willing to assess the claims provisionally, leaving the question of the liability of the United States' Government to be eventually decided by arbitration. I have to acquaint you that Her Majesty's Government are willing to proceed in accordance with Mr. Blaine's suggestion, and that you are authorized at once to commence negotiations for a tripartite Agreement respecting the establishment of a close season, and the assessment of damages sustained on account of the seizure of the vessels. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 284. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 11.) (Extract.) Downing Street, February 11, 1890. WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding a Minute of the Dominion Privy Council on the subject of the Notice published by the United States' Government calling for tenders for the lease of the Alaskan seal fisheries. Although, as suggested by the Canadian Government, the granting of such a lease as that referred to would be calculated to complicate the contemplated negotiations, Lord Knutsford is disposed to think that the issue of the Notice need not be held to preclude the commencement of those negotiations, and his Lordship desires me to suggest that a copy of this despatch should be sent to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, with instructions to communicate it to the United States' Government, if he sees no objection. Inclosure 1 in No. 284. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, January 20, 1S90. WITH reference to the proposals made by Mr. Bayard for a close season for seals in Behring's Sea, which was dealt with by my Government in the Orders in Council, copies of which were forwarded in my despatches of the 3rd August, 1888, and of the llth November, 18S9, I have the honour to forward herewith, for your Lordship's information, a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, embodying a Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, in regard to an advertisement recently issued by the Secretary of the Treasury for the United States, calling for tenders for the exclusive privilege of taking seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George of the Pribylov group in the Behring's Sea for a-terni df twenty years from the 1st May, 1890. * See No. 280. Ill 406 r Your Lordship will observe that my Government is apprehensive that a lease such as that contemplated in the advertisement, under which the monopoly whfch has existed fpr the past twenty years would be continued regardless of any close season, may interfere with the proposed negotiations for a close season. 8•,-c.v|s I have &c. :|M;: (Signed) | STANLEY OF PRESTON. If Inclosure 2 in No. 284. Hi! JReport of a-Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the; Governor-General in Council on the l&th January, 1890. ON a Report dated the 4th January, 1890, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries,, submitting in connection with the Minutes of Council of the 14th July, 1888, and 4th November, 1889, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General, upon the subject of the protection of fur-seals in the Behring's Sea, the appended advertisement recently issued by the Secretary of the Treasury for the United States of America, calling for tenders to be received up to the 23rd January instant for the exclusive privilege of taking fur-seals on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, of the Pribylov group, in the Behring's Sea, commonly known as the Seal Islands, for a term of twenty years from the 1st May, 1890. The Minister observes, in reference to the Honourable Mr. Bayard's proposal for international action in the establishment of a close season for seals in the Behring's Sea, extending from the 15th April to the 1st November, that the present advertisement would "indicate on the part of the United States' authorities the intention to continue that monopoly of the seal industry which has existed for the past twenty years, regardless of any close season applicable to the breeding grounds or rookeries of the seals. The Minister notices that the only important difference between the terms of the proposed lease and those in the lease held by the Alaska Commercial Company, expiring in May 1890, is the limitation in the number of seals to be annually killed, which is- stated to be 60,000, instead of 100,000, for the first year, the number to be fixed by the Treasury Department for succeeding years. The Minister desires to point out that the months open to the lessees of the breeding grounds for killing operations, during the next twenty years, are June, July, September, and October, or four of the months in the middle of the close season proposed by the Honourable Mr. Bayard on behalf of the United States' authorities. It has already been contended by your Excellency's advisers that the dates then proposed by the Honourable Mr. Bayard were fixed to practically exclude from fishing operations all vessels likely to frequent these waters for that purpose. The Minister observes that in support of the Honourable Mr. Bayard's proposal, it was contended that the British and other sealers were in the habit of killing and wounding the cow-seals with their young, and that therefore the necessity for the close season proposed by him was all the greater in the interest of the fishery; but upon this it may be said that the British vessels seized or expelled from the Behring's Sea, almost without exception, entered that sea, in the month of July, or during the height of the killing season of the Alaska Commercial Company, and as the female seals (according to the United States' authorities) repair to the rookeries in June and July, where they soon after bring forth their young, the opportunity for sealing-vessels to kill females with pup in the open waters of the Behring's Sea must be very rare. The Minister is of opinion that the attention of Her Majesty's Government should be called to this state of facts, and that they be informed that your Excellency's advisers are under the apprehension that the said lease may interfere with the proposed negotiations for a close season for Behring's Sea. The Committee concurring, advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for the information of Her Majesty's Government. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) John J. McGee, Clerk, Privy Council. Appendix. [See Inclosure in No. 268.] 407. No 280. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, February 11.) My Lord,. Washington, February 11, 1890. I COMMUNICATED the substance of your Lordship's telegram to Mr. Blaine late yesterday evening, and he consented to your Lordship's proposal to commence the tripartite negotiation and the assessment of damages at once. He said, at the same time, that he would communicate with the Russian Minister here on the subject and inform me of the result, with a view to common action by _your Lordship and himself in inviting Russia to participate in the negotiations. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 287. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley of Preston.—(Received at Foreign Office, February 12.) (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, February 12 INSTRUCTIONS sent to Minister at Washington to commence negotiations for establishment of a close season, and provisionally for assessment of claims for damage; he will also be directed to communicate with you as to fixing time for Representative of Dominion Government to assist you at Washington. No. 288. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote ■Bit, Foreign Office, February 12, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 28th ultimo, I have to request that you will bear in mind that all proposals from the United States' Government for the settlement of the Behring's Sea question should be received by you ad referendum. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 289. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—-(Substance telegraphed.) . -Sir, Foreign Office, February 13, 1890. I TRANSMIT to you herewith copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of 'Canada relative to the Behring's Sea negotiations ;* and Ihave to request you to communicate with the Governor-General of Canada with a view to settling the date on which the Representative of the Dominion, who will assist you in the negotiations, should arrive in Washington. * No. 287. (Signed) No^gfc Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—-(Received by telegraph, February 14.) My Lord, Washington, February 13, A §90. MR. BLAINE informed me tpT&ay that M. de Stcu^e, the Russj%pjl^BJster here, has telegraphed to his Government to inquire whether they consent to his taking part in the negotiations on the subject of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. o He hopes that your Lordship will, on your side,,jijOvite the Russjgn Government to participate in the proposed negotiations. (Signed) ' JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 291. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, February 14.) My Lord, Washington, February 13, 1890. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of to-day, I have the honour to inform your Lordship that I have written to the Governor-General of Canada and have requested him to be prepared to send a Canadian Agent to Washington, in order to assist me in the forthcoming negotiations on the subject of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. '• /,will not fail to telegraph to him as soon as I learn that the Eussian Government have consented to participate in the negotiations. I have &c (Signed) JTTLIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 292. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, February 14, 1890. WITH reference to your despatch of the 9th ultimo, I transmit herewith, J&r your information, a copy of a letter from the Colonial Office,* covering a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forWa'rding a Minute of the Dominion Privy Council on the subject of the Notice published by the United States' Government calling for tenders for the lease of the Alaska seal fisheries. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. Sir No. 293. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir R. Morier.—(Substance telegraphed.) Foreign Office, February 14, 1890. I HAVE to inform your Excellency that Her Majesty's Government have agreed with that of the United States that it is desirable to resume the negotiations, which ceased in 1888, between Great Britain, Russia, and the United States for the establishment of a close time for seals in the Behring's Sea. I should be glad if your Excellency would invite the Russian Government to give instructions to their Representative at Washington to take part in negotiations for the purpose. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. * No. 284. 409 • No. 294. Sir R. Morier to tlie Marquis of Salisbury.*—(Received by telegraph, February 23.) My Lord, St. Petersburgh, February 23, 1890. ON receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 14th instant, instructing me inquire of the Russian Government whether they would consent to their Minister at Washington faking part in the negotiations respecting a close time for seal-fishing, which Her Majesty's Government and the United States' Government are anxious to resume, I at once addressed a note to M. de Giers in this sense. I have now the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of the reply which I have received from M. de Giers, stating that the Russian Minister at Washington has been instructed by telegraph to take part in the negotiations as desired by your Lordship. [ have &c (Signed) ' R. B. D. MORIER. Inclosure in No. 294. M. de Giers to Sir R. Morier. M. l'Ambassadeur, Saint-Pe'tersbourg, le 9 (21) Fevrier, 1890. J'AI recu la note que votre Excellence a bien voulu m'adresser en date du 3 (15) courant au sujet de la reprise des negociations, interrompue3 en 1888, relative- ment a la fixation de la periode durant laquelle la chasse aux otaries serait defendue. Le Cabinet 'Imperial etant vivement d^sireux de mettre une fin aux discussions et aux malentendus, auxquels I'absence de tout reglement a ce sujet est de nature a donner lieu, le Ministre de Russie & Washington vient d'etre autorise' par telegraphe a prendre part aux negociations en question. En me faisant un devoir d'informer votre Excellence de ce qui precede, je saisis, &c. (Signe) GIERS. (Translation.) M. PAmbassadeur, St. Petersburgh, February 9 (21), 1890. I HAVE received the note which your Excellency was good enough to address to me on the 3rd (15th) instant, on the subject of the resumption of the negotiations, broken off in 1888, relative to the fixture of a period during which the hunting of fur-seals should be prohibited. The Imperial Cabinet earnestly desire to put an end to the discussions and misunderstandings to which the absence of any regulation on the subject is calculated to give rise, and the Minister of Russia at Washington has accordingly been authorized by telegraph to take part in the negotiations in question. While making it my duty to communicate the above to your Excellency, I avail, &c. (Signed) GIERS. ■ •"'1 No. 295. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 22.) Sir, Downing Street, February 22, 1890. WITH reference to the letter from this Department of the 6th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding the claim for compensation in the case of the British schooner " Minnie," which was seized by -the United States' Revenue cruizer " Richard Rush " in Behring's Sea last year. This claim completes the list of claims on account of these seizures. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. [128] * Substance sent to Sir J. Pauncefote by telegraph, February 22. 3 G WW 410 Inclosure 1 in No. 295. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, February 3, 1890. WITH reference to the Deputy Governor's despatch of the 20th September last relative to the seizure in Behring's Sea of the British schooner " Minnie " by the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush," I have the honour to transmit to your Lordship a copy of an approved Report of a Committee of the Privy Council, submitting formal statements and claim of the owner, Mr. Victor Jacobson, of Victoria, British Columbia, amounting to the sum of 16,460 dollars. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 295. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 31st January, 1890. ON a Report dated the 16th January, 1890, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, with reference to the seizure in the Behring's Sea of the British schooner "Minnie" (the circumstances attending which were detailed in a Minute of Council dated the 14th September, 1889), formal statements and claims by the owner, Mr. Victor Jacobson, of Victoria, British Columbia, to compensation for loss incurred by reason of the seizure of the said vessel, and the forcible removal therefrom to the United States11 Revenue cutter " Richard Rush " of 420 seal-skins, and guns, spears, &c, as well as for the value of the catch for the balance of the season had the vessel not been interfered with in the legitimate pursuit of her calling, which claim aggregates 16,460 doUars: The Committee, on the recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, advise that your Excellency be moved to forward copies hereof to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the Government of the United States. All which is respectfully submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 295. Declaration of Victor Jacobson. City of Victoria, Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada. I, VICTOR JACOBSON, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, Dominion of Canada, master mariner, do solemnly and sincely declare as follows:— 1. That I am the owner and master of the British vessel "Minnie," 50 tons burden, registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid. 2. That in the first part of the month of May last I cleared the said | Minnie | at the port of Victoria for a sealing and hunting voyage in the North Pacific Ocean and Behring's Sea, and sailed immediately afterwards. 3. I had a crew of five white men and sixteen Indians, with two boats for white hunters, eight canoes for Indian hunters, and completely provisioned and equipped for a full season's hunting and sealing in northern waters. 4. On the 27th day of June last I entered the Behring's Sea, through Ounimak Pass, having then on board about 150 seal-skins caught on the way up from Victoria. 3. I immediately engaged in hunting, and sealing and continued to do so until the loth July last, at which date I had on board 420 seal-skins in all. 0. On that day, the loth July last, about 4 o'clock in the afternoon, I sighted a steamer bearing down upon us, which proved to be the United States' Revenue steamer "Richard Rush." AVhen within hailing distance, an officer on the said "Rush " called out to me to heave-to, and I did so ; a boat was sent off from the " Rush'' with two officers and ten or twelve men. The officer and five or six men came on board the " Minnie." The officer in command asked me for my papers, which I handed to him. MOMH 411 He then asked me when I entered the sea, and how many skins I had. I told him, and he went back to the " Rush." In a short time he returned and told me he would take i all the skins, seize my vessel, and send her to Sitka in charge of a man from the | Rush." He then ordered his men to open the hatches and take all the seal-skins, 420 in number, on board the | Rush," which was done. He also took two guns and all the Indian spears. He then went back to the u Rush," but soon returned to my vessel with a man, and said to me that this man would take charge of the vessel, except navigating her, and take her to Sitka. 7. At the time of the seizure the " Minnie " was about 65 miles north-west by west from Ounimak Pass, and about the same distance from Ounimak Island, the nearest land. 8. An hour or so after the "Rush'' went away the man left in charge showed me his written instructions from Captain Shepard, of the " Richard Rush;" as nearly as I can remember the directions he was to deliver the "Minnie" to the United States' authorities at Sitka, and place her captain, myself, and mate under arrest. I at once made up my inind to stay where I was and catch what seals I could. Next morning I made new spears for the Indians and sent them out sealing. I remained in the sea. up to the 16th August following, and. in that time caught 486 seals and eight sea otters. I did not see anything of the " Rush " after the 15th July. 9. In the season of 1888 I was in command of the schooner " Mountain Chief," with ten Indian hunters only. The said " Mountain Chief " was iii Behring's Sea less than twenty days, and in seventeen days' actual sealing the ten Indian hunters caught 937 seal-skins. On the said schooner " Minnie," in 1889, I had sixteen Indian hunters and two white hunters, and but for the interference of the United States' Revenue cutter "Richard Rush," as aforesaid, the "Minnie" would have remained in Behring's Sea until about the 10th September, or a period of over two months. 10. I verily believe that if the "Minnie" had not been boarded, and the guns and spears taken as aforesaid, that the total catch of seal-skins by the hunters on board her for the season in Behring's Sea would not have been less than 2,500. 11. The value at Victoria aforesaid of seal-skins on or about the close of the sealing season for 1889, and for some time both before and after such close, was 8 dollars per skin. I claim damages from the Government of the United States of America for the seizure of the said " Minnie " as aforesaid, and for the taking and detention of the said 420 seal-skins, and for 1,594 seal-skins, the balance of an estimated catch of 2,500, by the " Minnie " in Behring's Sea for the season of 1889, also for the guns, spears, and salt taken as aforesaid, and for legal and other expenses incidental to and arising out of such seizure, and the preparation and submission of this claim therefor, and interest thereon at 7 per cent, per annum until paid, a statement in detail of which claim is hereunto annexed. And I, Victor Jacobson, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Act respecting extra-judicial oaths. (Signed) VICTOR JACOBSON. Declared by the said Victor Jacobson, at the city of Victoria, the 4th day of January, 1890. Before me, (Signed) Arthur L. Belyea, A Notary Public, by Royal authority, in and for the Province of British Columbia. Statement of Claim.—Schooner "Minnie." For damages for seizure, &c, in Behring's Sea, July 15,1889, by United States' Revenue cutter " Richard Rush." 420 seal skins taken from " Minnie " by " Richard Rush." 1,594 balance of estimated catch of 2,500 in Behring's Sea in 1889 by " Minnie," after deducting 486 brought to Victoria by " Minnie." 2,014 at 8 dollars per skin .. .. .. 1 gun at 55 dollars, 1 gun at 10 dollars 10 Indian spears, at 3 dollars .. .. .- •• 2 sacks salt, at 1 dol. 50 c. Legal and other expenses ., .. .. .. .. Total claim .. .. .. • • • • And interest on said amount at 7 per cent, per annum until paid. 128 J Dollar! 250 412 This is the Statement referred to in the annexed declaration of Victor Jacobson, made before me the 4th day of January, 1890. (Signed) ARTHUR L. BELYEA, Notary Public. No. 296. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, February 23.) My Lord, Washington, February 22, 1890. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram of to-day, I have the honour to report that I have telegraphed to Lord Stanley to inquire when I may expect the arrival in Washington of the Canadian Agent who is to assist me in the coming negotiations. Mr. Blaine, M. de Struve, the Russian Minister, and I, held a preliminary and informal meeting this morning, at which the question of the area of the possible arrangement was discussed. Mr. Blaine and M. de Struve then proposed the following area: " From a point on the 50th parallel north latitude due south from the southernmost point of the Peninsula of Kamtchatka; thence due east on the said 50th parallel to the point of the intersection with the 160th meridian of longitude west from Greenwich; thence north and east by a straight line to the point of intersection of the 60th parallel of north latitude with the 140th meridian of longitude west from Greenwich." The 50th parallel, as your Lordship is aware, was the southernmost limit proposed by Mr. Bayard, and it need only be extended on the west to the Kamtchatka Peninsula, as M. de Struve states that there is no seal fishery in the Sea of Ochotsk. I objected, however, to the limit on the east being extended beyond the 160th meridian of longitude, which was the limit proposed by Mr. Bayard, and is quite sufficient for the necessities of the case. I should be much obliged if your Lordship would inform me whether you approve of the area now suggested by Mr. Blaine and M. de Struve, provided it be limited on the east by the 160th meridian. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 297. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, February 24, 1890. WITH reference to the letter from this Office of the 22nd instant, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit to you the accompanying copy of a telegram from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington,* giving the result of an informal conversation with the Secretary of State and the Russian Minister on the subject of an area within which the proposed arrangement relating to the Behring's Sea seal fisheries might be applied. I am to request that, in laying this telegram before the Secretary of State for the Colonies, you will move his Lordship to favour Lord Salisbury, at his earliest convenience, with his opinion as to the answer which should be returned to it. I am, &c. (Signed) T. H. SANDERSON. No. 298. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received February 28.) Sir, Downing Street, February 27, 1890. I AM directed by Lord Kmifsford to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 24th instant, inclosing a telegram from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, in which he reports f.he result of a preliminary and informal Conference on the subject of the area * No. 296. 413 within which the proposed close season for fur-seals in Behring's Sea should be confined, and requesting instructions as to the distance to the eastward at which the line limiting such area should be drawn.- I am to observe, in reply, that in order to avoid unnecessary interference with British subjects, it is desirable that the area no less than the period of the close season should be confined within the strictest limits absolutely essential for the preservation of the seals from extermination; and the line proposed by Sir J. Pauncefote appears to Lord Knutsford to include more of the open sea than is necessary, bearing in mind that the object of the negotiations is solely the sufficient preservation of the seals, and not the maintenance in its integrity of the monoply claimed on behalf of the lessees of the Pribylofi Islands. It appears to his Lordship that this object might be attained sufficiently by fixing an area round these islands within which sealing should be prohibited during the period when the female seals are on these islands, or in their near neighbourhood, and also possibly in the immediate vicinity of the passes of the Aleutian Islands. The matter is one, however, on which the Secretary of State for the Colonies could not undertake to express any definite opinion without that information which the Government of Canada is alone able to supply ; and his Lordship would suggest, in order to save time, that Sir J. Pauncefote should be desired to confer with Mr. Tupper, the Dominion Minister of Marine and Fisheries, who, it is understood is now at Washington, before committing Her Majesty's Government to any line of demarcation which the Government of Canada may hereafter object to as undesirable. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 299. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, February 28, 1890. I HAVE had under my consideration, in communication, with the Secretary of State for the Colonies, your telegram of the 23rd instant, reporting the result of a preliminary discussion with Mr. Blaine and the Russian Minister at Washington respecting the area within which it is proposed to prohibit seal fishing in Behring's Sea during a fixed period of each year. Before coming to any decision with regard to the area now proposed, Lord Knutsford would be glad to know what view of it is taken by the Government of Canada. I have accordingly to request you, in order to save time, to consult the Canadian Minister of Marine, who is now at Washington, on the subject, and to inform me of his opinion by telegraph. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 300. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 5-) My Lord, Washington, February 11, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 7th instant, I have the honour to report that I had a further interview this day with the Secretary of State, at his request, on the subject of the proposed arbitration, and provisional assessment of damages. Mr. Blaine said that it might be convenient if he were to put in writing, informally, his views as to the question to be arbitrated, and the procedure to be followed in regard to the assessment of damages. He accordingly, in my presence, drew up a Memorandum, of which he afterwards handed me a copy. It is in the following terms:— "The first question to be arbitrated is whether, under.the circumstances existing at the time, the Government of the United States was justified in arresting and detaining the vessels that entered the Behring's Sea for the purpose of killing fur-seals in the open sea. " In the event of the arbitrator finding that the Government of the United States was justified in arresting and detaining the vessels before described, the case would be finished. M-'-kl PBH 2E5S53' 414 "In the event that the Government of the United States was found not to be justified, the second question would be the ascertainment of the amount of damages due to the Government of Great Britain. If that amount could not be amicably determined by the British Minister in Washington and the American Secretary of State, it would be left to the determination of the arbitrator, who should find the amount according to certain principles previously agreed to by both Parties." I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 801. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 5.) My Lord, Washington, February 20, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inclose an extract from the " New York Herald " of yesterday stating that the Russian Government has confirmed the renewal of the lease of the Russian seal islands in Behring's Sea to the Alaska Commercial Company. I am, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 301. Extract from the "New York Herald" of February 19, 1890. »The Fur-Seal Monopoly.—Russia renews the Alaska Company's Lease of Islands in Behring's Sea. [By Telegraph to the "Herald."] San Francisco, February 18, 1890. A PRIVATE despatch received here to-day announces that the Imperial Russian Government has confirmed the renewal of the lease of the Russian seal islands in Behring's Sea to the Alaska Commercial Company of this city. This action is understood to be based upon a persuasion that the Government of the United States will take a similar course with regard to its own seal islands, and that the control of the seal-fur industry may thus be vested in a single management. Incorporation op an Alaska Commercial Company in New York. Albany, New York, February 18, 1890. The New York Commercial Company of Alaska (Limited), formed with a capital of 1,000,000 dollars, for carrying on mining, fishing, building, and commercial enterprises generally in the Territory of Alaska, filed a certificate of incorporation with the Secretary of State to-day. The incorporators of the Company are William B. Pope, Thaddeus D. Bradford, William T. Davis, and John H. Droge, of New York; and Henry S. Tibbey, of Unga Island, Alaska. No. 302. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, March 8, 1890. I HAVE received your despatch of the 7th ultimo, reporting a conversation which you had held with Mr. Blaine on the subject of damages for the seizure of Canadian vessels by the United States' Revenue cutters in Behring's Sea. Your language on the occasion is approved. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. 415 No. 303. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 15.) Sir Downing Street, March 11, 1890. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to acknowledge the receipt of copies of despatches from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington respecting communications which have passed with the United States' Secretary of State as to the compensation for the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea.* I am to observe that the terms on which Mr. Blaine would propose to submit the question of compensation to arbitration, as stated in his Memorandum, taken together with his further statement that no established principles of international law would be brought into dispute, appear to indicate that he would abandon, before the arbitrator, not only the mare clausum doctrine, but also the claim of an exclusive right of fishery in Behring's Sea, and would rely on the contention that the United States are charged with the duty of repressing acts done in that sea, contra bonos mores, to the injury of a fishery open to all nations. Lord Knutsford cannot doubt that an impartial arbitrator, whether all the three issues or only one of them be placed before him, would confirm the opinion that the owners are entitled to compensation for the ill-treatment to which they have bejerr/spbjected. Lord Knutsford, however, desires me to observe that the question whether recourse should be had to arbitration on thfesubject, and the"precise"issuBS"to be submittedrto-aa arbitrator, are matters on which it is important to ascertain the views of the Government of Canada. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 304. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, March 15, 1890. HER Majesty's Government have had under their consideration your despatches of the 7th and 11th ultimo, reporting the substance of conversations you had had with Mr. Blaine on the question of the claims for damages on account of seizures of British vessels by American cruizers in Behring's Sea, and on his proposal to refer the question of the liability of the United States' Government to the decision of some eminent jurisconsult. I transmit, for your information and guidance, a copy of a letter'from the Colonial Office, containing Lord Knutsford's observations on your Reports above referred to.t I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 305. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 17.) My Lord, Washington, march 1, 1890. .~I—HAVE- the—honour--to report that the Honourable Charles H. Tupper, the Dominion Minister of Marine and Fisheries, arrived here on the 25th ultimo, and on the 27th was presented by me to the Secretary of State. He was this day presented by Mr. Blaine to the President. On the occasion of our visit to the Secretary of State we had some informal conversation with him as to the procedure to be followed in the tripartite negotiation. Mr. Blaine apparently considered that we should commence at once to discuss the limits of the proposed close season as regards its area and duration. I pointed out, however, that I deemed it essential, in the first place, to examine the evidence on which the United States' Government base their contention as to necessity for a close season. Mr. Blaine objected that such ah inquiry would cause a delay of several months, and Nos. 280 and 300, f No. 302. SSfifi£??55|Mj^5S98B3f?l8Rl DHH 416 that it was unnecessary, as the case for a close season had been established by the evidence of numerous United States' officials and experts, and that the result of their researches and practical experience during the last twenty years had already been published to the world. I replied that their evidence had been contested, and that, in my opinion, it was of the highest importance that a conclusion on the point should, if possible, be arrived at in the course of the present negotiation, for the satisfaction not only of my Government, but of all the other Governments who, if an arrangement should be concluded, will be invited to accede to it. I urged that no delay would be occasioned, as I could not see any reason why we should not proceed provisionally and concurrently with the other questions involved, such as the area and duration of the close season, the consideration of which would be materially assisted by the inquiry I proposed. After some further discussion, in which Mr. Tupper took part, Mr. Blaine agreed to furnish extracts from the evidence already published -by his Government, on which they relied as establishing the case for a close season, and it was arranged that the first meeting of the negotiators should take place at the State Department on Monday, the 3rd instant, at 11 o'clock. r have &c (Signed) ! JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 306. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 17.) My Lord, Washington, March 4, 1S90. WITH reference to my despatch of the 26th December, I have the honour to inclose an extract from the "Washington Post," in which it is stated that the North American Commercial Company of New York and San Francisco have been granted a lease for taking fur seals upon the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, for a period of twenty years from the 1st May next. L have &c (Signed) ' JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 306. Extract from the " Washington Post" of March 1, 1890. Alaska Fisheries Lease.—Secretary Windom has directed a lease to be made with the North American Commercial Company of New York and San Francisco, I. Liebes, President, for the exclusive privilege of taking fur seals upon the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, Alaska, for a period of twenty years from the 1st May next. The following are the names of the Directors of the North American Commercial Company: Lloyd Trevis, Henry Cowell, Mathias Meyer, and Isaac Liebes, all of San Francisco, and Albert Miller, of Oakland, California. Mr. David 0. Mills, of New York, is a Director of the Company. Its capital stock is 2,000,000 dollars. The annual revenue to the Government under this lease on the basis of 100,000 seals per annum will be about 1,000,000 dollars, as against about 300,000 dollars under the present lease to the Alaska Commercial Company. No. 307. • Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 17.) My Lord, Washington, March 7, 1S90. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your Lordship's despatch of the 12th ultimo, in which you request me to bear in mind that all proposals from the United States' Government for the settlement of the Behring's Sea should be received by me ad referendum, and I beg to state that I shall strictly adhere to your Lordship's instructions. I have &c (Signed) ' JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 417 No. 308. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, March 18.) (Extract.) Washington, March 18, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 1st instant, I have the honour to report that the Behring's Sea negotiations have come to a deadlock, owing to a conflict of evidence in regard to the necessity for a close season for the fur-seal fishery. Mr. Blaine and M. de Struve both agree that the preservation of the fur-seal species is the sole object in view; but they insist, at the same time, that it will necessitate the total exclusion of sealing vessels from Behring's Sea during the close season. Mr. Tupper, on the other hand, maintains that no close season is necessary at all; but I believe the Canadian Government are ready to give way to some extent on this point. Mr. Blaine says that the arguments on his proposal are exhausted, and has called upon me to put forward a counter-proposal. I have accordingly prepared a draft Convention, which, I venture to state, offers the only prospect of a possible arrangement. Mr. Tupper left for Ottawa last night, taking with him a copy of it, which he will submit for the consideration of the Canadian Government. I will not fail to telegraph the reply of the Canadian Government to my proposal, and shall then await further instructions from your Lordship. In the meanwhile, negotiations are suspended. No. 309. Tlu: Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, March 19, 1890 HER Majesty's Government approve your proceedings in connection with the negotiations for the establishment of a close season in the Behring's Sea seal fishing, as reported in your despatch of the 1st instant. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 310. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received March 20.) Sir, Downing Street, March 19, 1890, WITH reference to previous correspondence, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding a Schedule of the claims for compensation for damages resulting from the seizure of British vessels in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. I IiH-lusurc 1 in No. 310. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord. Government House, Ottawa, February 3, 1890. I HAD the honour to send to your Lordship to-day the following telegraphic message in code :— "One additional claim for compensation 'Minnie' 16,460 dollars. Summary of claims by post. Have sent copy, for his information, to Minister at Washington.'' I have now the honour to transmit a copy of a Privy Council Order on which my telegram was based. A copy of this Minute has been forwarded to Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, for his information. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. [128J 3 H 418 ml life It Inclosure 2 in No. 310. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 3rd February, 1890. THE Committee of the Privy Council have had before them the cablegram from the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, dated the 30th January, 1890, of which the substance is as follows :— "Are there any further claims for compensation for Behring's Sea seizures, and can you state their amount?" The Minister of Marine and Fisheries, to whom the cablegram was referred, observes that my despatch of the 6th January inclosed a copy of an Order in Council of the 28th December, 1889, in reference to the compensation claimed by the owners of the "Kate," and that a claim on behalf of the owners of the "Minnie" has, since the date of the despatch alluded to, been formally made and forwarded to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Minister further, in order that no claim relating to the seizures in Behring's Sea may escape the attention of Her Majesty's Government, recommends that the appended reply to the above message be forwarded by your Excellency to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for the information of Her Majesty's Government. The Committee advise that your Excellency be moved to cable the reply as herewith submitted. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Appendix. Proposed Reply from his Excellency the Governor-General to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies. following claims have reached my Government, and have been duly THE forwarded 1886. 1S86. 1886. 1886. 1887. 1887. 1887. 3 887. 1887. 1887. 1889. 1889. 1889. 1889. 1889. 1889. 1889. 1889. \ Corolena," 40,739 dollars ; and personal claims, 5,000 dollars. 'Onward," 39,1S1 dollars; personal claims, 6,500 dollars. ' Thornton," 43,576 dollars ; personal claims, 6,500 dollars. 'Favorite," 7,000 dollars. ' Anna Beck," 43,764 dollars; personal claims, 3,000 dollars. 'Sayward," 42,481 doUars; personal claims, 3,000 dollars. •Dolphin," 59,950 dollars; personal claims, 3,635 dollars. ' Grace," 57,964 dollars; personal claims, 2,000 dollars. 'Ada," 34,518 dollars; personal claims, 2,000 dollars. 1 Alfred Adams," 20,433 doUars. ' Black Diamond," 17,185 dollars. 'Pathfinder," 26,765 dollars. ' Juanita," 14,695 dollars. 'Lily," 17,167 dollars. ' Triumph," 19,674 dollars. ■' Ariel," 9,498 dollars. 'Kate," 11,210 dollars. ' Minnie," 16,460 dollars. No. 311. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, Foreign Office, March 20, 1890. WITH reference to my letter of the 15th instant, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit herewith, for the information of Secretary Lord Knutsford, a copy of a telegram from Sir J. Pauncefote,* reporting on the present state of the negotiations on the Behring's Sea question. I am at the same time to say that, before taking any further action in regard to this telegram, Lord Salisbury proposes to wait for information from Sir J. Pauncefote as to whether the Canadian Government are disposed to take a favourable view of the * IS'o. 308. 419 Convention which he has drafted for the protection of the fur seals resorting to Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 312. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received by telegraph, March 26.) My Lord, Washington, March 26, 1890. I HAVE the honour to rep'ort that some of to-day's newspapers announce the publication of the Proclamation relating to the seal fishery in Behring's Sea, which the President of the United States is bound by law to issue "at a timely season in each year." Mr. Blaine told me a few days ago that it was ready for publication. I have &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 313. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 31.) My Lord, jj Washington, March 21, 1890. IN continuation of my despatch of the 1st instant relating to the Behring's Sea fisheries, I have the honour to report that the first formal meeting of the Conference between the Secretary of State, M. de Struve (the Russian Minister), and myself took place on the 3rd instant, and that Mr. Tupper, the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, was present on the occasion. A long discussion took place on the subject of a close season. Mr. Blaine and M. de Struve contended that not only was a close season indispensable for the preservation of the fur-seal species, but that no close season would be effectual for securing the object in view unless during the period of its duration all sealing vessels of whatever nationality were absolutely excluded from the Behring's Sea. The Russian Minister stated that since the date of our preliminary meeting of the 22nd ultimo (reported by me to your Lordship on the same day), at which a line of demarcation for a close season had been informally proposed by Mr. Blaine and himself, he had received instructions from his Government to press that the line should commence on the west from a point at the' southern extremity of the Island of Saghalien, In order to protect the rookery or breeding place on Robin Reef in the Sea of Ochotsk. On the other hand, Mr. Blaine seemed disposed to agrefe that on the east the line should terminate at the 160th meridian of longitude west from Greenwich, as originally proposed by the United States' Government. Mr. Tupper, who was then invited to express his views, strongly contended that a close season was not necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species. All that was really required for that purpose was to use greater vigilance for the protection of the rookeries against the destruction of seals on shore by marauding parties. This would be effectually carried out by the United States' Government by the employment of additional cruizers, without necessitating the exclusion of all sealing vessels from the Behring's Sea for any period. A great deal of argument ensued on the evidence of particular witnesses and the reports of officials and experts, in the course of which Mr. Blaine laid great stress on a passage in the Report of Mr. Mowatt, Inspector of Fisheries for British Columbia, which is cited in Mr. Hayard's despatch to Mr. Phelps of the 7th February, 1883. It is to the effect that the enormous catch of fur seal in Behring's Sea by schooners from San Francisco and Victoria consisted principally of " cows " or female seals, and that, in view of the increase of vessels fitting out every year, there was reason to apprehend, in the opinion of the writer, that unless some measure of protection were adopted, the fur- seal fishery would soon be depleted. It was agreed to adjourn the meeting until we had examined a Memorandum of the evidence relied on by the United States' Government which Mr. Blaine had promised to furnish, as reported in my despatch of the 1st instant. This Memorandum was delivered the same day, and Mr. Tupper immediately prepared a counter-Memorandum in support of his views. Both documents are in course of printing, and copies will be transmitted to your Lordship as early as practicable. [128] 3 H 2 III BB 420 ii They unfortunately present so great a divergence of opinion on all the facts relating to the fur-seal fishery in the Behring's Sea, that Mr. Blaine decided to invite M. de Struve and myself to an interview on the 12th instant, at which he stated that the perusal of Mr. Tapper's Memorandum had convinced him of the hopelessness of arriving at a solution that would be satisfactory to Canada. He said he had exhausted all the arguments in favour of the proposal made by the United States' Government two years ago, and he called on me to make a counter-proposal on behalf of Her Majesty's Government. I replied that I was reluctant to make a counter-proposal without previous reference to your Lordship, but that I did not take so desponding a view of the situation as he appeared to do. It had been admitted and agreed that the sole object of the proposed arrangement was the preservation of the fur-seal species, and not the gain or benefit of any particular Government or body of persons. I did not believe that Canada, in view of the conflict of evidence, would object to a reasonable close season, at all events by way of experiment, and with a view to the further elucidation of the question. The difficulty was to fix the limits of a close season both as to its area and its duration. Mr. Bayard in his despatch to Mr. White of the 1st May, 1888, had distinctly stated that only such a period is desired " as may be requisite for the end in view." This equally applied to the question of area. It would be strange therefore if no machinery could be devised to surmount the difficulty. I then stated that I had prepared a scheme which provided such machinery, and that I had actually put it in the form of a draft Convention which I proposed to refer to your Lordship, and, if approved, to lay before the Conference as the counter-proposal of Her Majesty's Government. I then explained the general provisions of the scheme. The draft Convention lays down in the first place that there shall be a close season, but that in view of the conflict of evidence which has arisen as to what should be its area and duration, a Commission of experts shall be appointed to report on the matter, and that if on the examination of their Report the three Governments should still be unable to settle the conditions of a close season, the points in difference shall be referred to the arbitration of an impartial Government, whose award shall finally determine the close season for the purposes of the Convention. The draft also provides for the immediate adoption and enforcement of a provisional close time as to which the High Contracting Parties would probably be disposed to be more yielding by reason of its temporary and experimental character, and in view of the prospect of an ultimate and impartial decision on the questions in dispute. The other Articles of the draft provide for the enforcement of the close season, the trial of offenders, the duration of the Convention, and the accession thereto of other Powers. Mr. Blaine and M. de Struve declined to look at the draft or to express any opinion on the scheme until it should be formally placed before them, but they listened to its details with evident interest, and I observed no indication of serious dissent or unfavourable criticism on their part. I am not without hope therefore that if its general features should meet with your Lordship's approval, it may form a basis of arrangement, and present an issue out of the difficulties of the situation. Mr. Tupper, who concurs generally in the draft, has returned to Ottawa to consult his Government thereon, and the next meeting of the Conference is adjourned pending the receipt of your Lordship's further instructions. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 314. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received March 31.) My Lord, Washington, March 21, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inclose a cutting from the New York " Tribune " of the 19th instant, containing an article on the Alaska Sea fisheries, headed "Rights in Behring's Sea." I have been una,ble to discover that any American jurist has ever ventured to assert that the United States can claim any special jurisdiction over Behring's Sea, or any 421 exclusive right of fishery therein, or to support the extraordinary argument that the correspondence between the Russian and United States' Governments in 1823 had no reference to Behring's Sea. On the other hand, the fallacy of the views put forward in the " New York Tribune " has been demonstrated, as your Lordship is aware, by two eminent American writers, Professor Rayner, in his letters to the "New York Evening Post" of the 27th June and 18th October, 1889, and Professor Angel, in his article in the "Forum" of November 1889. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 315. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, April 3, 1890. THE principle of the draft Convention has my full approval. No. 316. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 9.) Sir, Downing Street, April 9, 1890. IN reply to your letter of the'20th ultimo, forwarding copy of a telegram from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington, on the present state of the negotiations on the Behring'.s Sea question, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to acquaint you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, that he concurs in his Lordship's proposal to await information as to the views of the Canadian Government on the subject of the Convention which Sir J. Pauncefote has suggested before taking any action in the matter. I am, &c. (Signed) R. H. MEADE. No. 317. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 10.) My Lord, Washington, March 31, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inclose herewith a newspaper extract relative to the detention of the British sealing-vessel "Pathfinder "at Portland, Oregon. She was seized last year in Behring's Sea, and ordered to Sitka in charge of one seaman. She escaped to Victoria, and has been engaged in sealing till compelled to go into Portland Bay for repairs, where she was detained till released by instructions from the Secretary of the Treasury dated the 29th instant, on the ground that the Federal Courts of Alaska have exclusive jurisdiction over all violations of the Seal Fishery Laws. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 317. Extract from the "New York Tribune," of March 30, 1890. Portland, Oregon, March 29, 1890. THE British sealing schooner "Pathfinder,'' Captain Arthur Morgan, of Victoria, was towed into port last night by the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin." The schooner was found at Neagh Bay, Washington, with rudder disabled, and taken into custody by the cutter. The " Pathfinder " is not seized, but detained pending instructions from the Department at Washington. The schooner is one of the sealing-vessels seized last year in Behring's Sea by the cutter " Richard Rush," and ordered to Sitka, Alaska, in charge of one seaman as a prizemaster. She escaped to Victoria, and has since been engaged in sealing off the American and British coasts till yesterday, when compelled to go into the bay for repairs. Captain Hooper, of the "Corwin," holds the vessel pending the decision of the Department relative to whether the vessel is amenable to the Law regarding, sealing in Behring's Sea, for. which she was seized. H mm 422 The " Pathfinder " sailed from Victoria two months ago; she secured 150 seals oft the coast of Vancouver and Washington. Particulars of the detention have been sent to the Secretary of the Treasury at Washington, also to the Department at Ottawa, Canada. Washington, March 29, 1890. The following telegram was sent by Assistant Secretary Tichenor this afternoon to the Collector of Customs at Port Townsend, Washington :— " In the year 1887 the Department, in a case quite similar, but in some respects stronger for the Government, decided that the vessel could not be held. In view of that precedent, without now reviewing the principles upon which it proceeded, I direct the release of the ' Pathfinder.' " The precedent referred to in the above telegram was the case of the schooner "Ellen." That vessel was seized in Behring's Sea in 18S7, by Captain Shepard, of the Revenue Marine Service, for violation of the Seal Fishery Laws, and was ordered to Sitka, Alaska, for trial. Instead, however, her captain took her to San Francisco. She was there seized by the Customs officers, but was subsequently released by direction of Secretary Fairchild, on the ground that the Federal officers at San Francisco had no jurisdiction over offences committed in the District of Alaska. Under this ruling the Federal Courts of Alaska will have exclusive jurisdiction over all violations of the Seal Fishery Laws. No. 318. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 18.) • lr, Downing Street, April 14, 1890. 1 AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, copies of telegraphic correspondence with the Governor-General of Canada respecting the proposed Convention for the establishment of a close time for seals in Behring's Sea. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure 1 in No. 318. Lord Knutsford to Lord Stanley, of Preston. (Telegraphic.) Downing Street, April 11, 1890. TELEGRAPH whether, as I hope, your Government has agreed to Minister at Washington's proposed Behring's Sea Convention. Inclosure 2 in No. 318. Ijord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. (Telegraphic.) (Received April 12, 1890.) MINISTER OF MARINE has returned to Washington with our alternative proposal. We are quite ready to acquiesce in general principle of protecting seal life, but are most anxious that inquiry by experts may precede permanent Treaty, as we believe the facts to. be incorrect on which United States' proposals are based. We suggest modus vivendi for not more than two years, during which experts should determine the facts on which permanent Treaty can be based. Cannot answer your question till we hear, which we expect to do soon, from Washington. No disposition here to raise unnecessary difficulties, but if we get no better terms than those proposed by United States, seal fishery will be seriously affected. No. 319. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received April 19.) Downing Street, April 19, 1890. 1 AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a telegram from the Governor-General of Canada, Sir, OTHHBB 423 reporting that his Government accept with some modifications Sir J. Pauncefote's second draft Convention for establishing a close season for fur seals in Behring's Sea. Lord Knutsford will be glad to have a copy of the second draft, with the modjfiGg* tions suggested by the Dominion Government, if it has been telegraphed by Sir J. Pauncefote. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. Inclosure in No. 319. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. ■ (Telegraphic.) April 18, 1890. THE Prime Minister told me this afternoon that his Cabinet will accept Sir J. Pauncefote's second draft with some modifications, which, in my opinion, do not injure it. I have telegraphed to tell him so. I hope grave difficulty is now over so far as Canada is concerned. No. 320. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 21.) (Extract.) Washington, April. 11, 1890. I HAVE the honour to report that the Honourable Mr. Tupper, the Dominion Minister of Marine and Fisheries, called on me yesterday on his return from Ottawa. He informed me that the Canadian Government objected to my proposed draft pf a Convention for the settlement of the Behring's Sea question in so far as it admitted the necessity of a close season, and provided, although provisionally, for the exclusion of sealers within a certain radius round the breeding islands. I understand that the principal objection of the Canadian Government to the radius clause is that it would practically have the effect of an admission that it was necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species; and they maintain the position that no interference with pelagic sealing is necessary for the purpose in view. I am anxious that the proposal of Her Majesty's Government should be prapljlcaj; and liberal, and such as will commend itself to the sense of justice and impartiality of all other nations. On the other hand, 1 need hardly say how anxious I am to give the utmost effect to the views and wishes of the Dominion Government in this negotiation. I have therefore prepared a new'draft Convention, of which I inclose copy, and in which I have followed, as closely as is consistent with the views above expressed, the lines indicated by the Canadian Government. I am sending a copy of the new draft this day to Lord Stanley, together with a copy of this despatch. In the meanwhile, I should be grateful if your Lordship would inform me by telegram -whether you concur in the views I have expressed and approve of the new draft which I have prepared, or whether you desire that I should adopt the first draft as amended by the Dominion Government, as the counter-proposal of Her Majesty's Government. [For draft Convention as proposed to United States' Government, see Inclosure 2 in No. 326.] No. 321. | Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 25.) M.y Lord, Washington, April 15, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 21st ultimo. I have the honour to inclose herewith copies of the correspondence relating to the fur-seal fisheries in Behring's Sea, which I have just received from Mr. Blaine, and which consists of the SS wm 424 evidence furnished by experts and officers of the United States, and the counter-evidence furnished in reply thereto by Mr. Tupper, on the question of the extermination of the fur-seal species by the killing of seals in the open sea. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 321. Correspondence relating to Fur-Seal Fisheries in Behring's Sea. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. My dear Sir Julian, Department of State, Washington, March 1, 1890. I HAVE extracted from official documents and appended hereto a large mass of evidence, given under oath by professional experts and officers of the United States, touching the subject upon which you desired further proof, namely, that the killing of seals in the open sea tends certainly and rapidly to the extermination of the species. If further evidence is desired, it can be readily furnished. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. From the official Report made to the House of Representatives in 1889 :— In former years fur-seals were found in great numbers on various islands of the South Pacific Ocean, but after a comparatively short period of indiscriminate slaughter the rookeries were deserted, the animals having been killed or driven from their haunts \ so that now the only existing rookeries are those in Alaska, another in the Russian part of Behring's Sea, and a third on Lobos Island, at the mouth of the River Plate in South America. All these rookeries are under the protection of their several Governments. The best estimate as to the number of these animals on the Alaska rookeries places it at about 4,000,000: but a marked diminution of the numbers is noticed within the last two or three years, which is attributed by the testimony to the fact that unauthorized persons during the summers of 1886, 1887, and 1888 had fitted out expeditions and cruized in Alaskan waters, and by the use of fire-arms destroyed hundreds of thousands of these animals without regard to age or sex. The law prohibits the killing of fur-seals in the Territory of Alaska or the waters thereof, except by the lessee of the Seal Islands, and the lessee is permitted to kill during the months of June, July, September, and October only; and is forbidden to kill any seal less than 1 year old, or any female seal, " or to kill such seals at any time by the use of fire-arms, or by other means tending to drive the seals away from those islands." (Revised Statutes, section 1960.) Governor Simpson, of the Hudson Bav Company, in Ms " Overland Journey Bound the World," 1841-42, p. 130, says :- " Some twenty or thirty years ago there was a most -wasteful destruction of the seal, when young and old, male and female, were indiscriminately knocked in the head. This imprudence, as any one might have expected, proved detrimental in two ways. The race was almost extirpated, and the market was glutted to such a degree, at the rate for some time of 200,000 skins a-year, that the prices did not even pay the expenses of carriage. The Russians, however, have now adopted nearly the same plan which the Hudson Bay Company pursues in recruiting any of its exhausted districts, killing only a limited number of such males as have attained their full growth, a plan peculiarly applicable to the fur-seal, inasmuch as its habits render a system of husbanding the stock as easy and certain as that of destroying it." In the year 1800 the rookeries of the Georgian Islands produc 823, says the "Encyclopaedia Britannica," "the Georgian Islands luced 112,000 fur-seals. From 1806 to 1823, says the g Encyclopaedia Britannica," " the Georgian Islands produced 1,200,000 seals, and the Island of Desolation has been equally productive." Over 1,000,000 were taken from the Island of Mas-a-Fuera and shipped to China in =1798-99. (Eanning's "Voyages to the South Sea," p. 299.) In 1820 and 1821 over 300,000 fur-seals were taken at the South Shetland Islands, and Captain Weddell states that at the end of the second year the species had there become almost exterminated. In addition to the number killed for their furs, he estimates that " not less than 100,000 newly-born young died in consequence of the destruction of their mothers." (See Elliott's Eeport, 1884; p. 118.) In 1830 the supply of fur-seals in the South Seas had so greatly decreased that the vessels engaged in this enterprise "generally made losing voyages, from the fact that those places which were the resort of seals had been abandoned by them." (Eanning's " Voyages," p. 487.) At Antipodes Island, off the coast of New South Wales, 400,000 skins were obtained in the years 1814 and 1815. Referring to these facts, Professor Elliott, of the Smithsonian Institution, in his able Eeport on the Seal Islands, published by the Interior Department in 1884, says :— " This gives a very fair idea of the manner in which the business was conducted in the South Pacific. How long would our sealing interests in Behring's Sea withstand the attacks of sixty vessels carrying from twenty to thirty men each ? Not over two seasons. The fact that these great southern rookeries withstood and paid for attacks of this extensive character during a period of more than twenty years speaks eloquently of the millions upon millions that must have existed in the waters now almost deserted bv them." 425 Mr. R H. Chapel, of New London, Connecticut, who?o vessels had visited all the rookeries of the South Pacific, in his written statement before the Committee on Commerce of the House .of Representatives, said:— « hI;: "As showing the progress of this trade in fur-seal skins, and the abuses of its prosecution, resulting in almost total annihilation of the animals in some localities, it is stated on good authority that, from about 1770 to 1800, Kerguelen Land, in the Indian Ocean, yielded to the English traders over 1,000.000 skins; but open competition swept oiT the herds that resorted there, and since the latter.year hardly 100 per annum could be obtained on all its lon» coast. Afterwards Mas-a-Fuera Island, near Juan Fernandez, •was visited, and 50,000 a-year were obtained; but as every one that desired was free to go and kill, the usual result followed—the -seals were exterminated at that island, and also at the Galapagos group near by. "Falkland and Shetland Islands, and South American coasts, near Capo Horn, came next in order; here the seal were very abundant. It is stated that at the Shetlands alone 100,000 per annum might have been obtained and the rookeries preserved, if taken under proper restrictions; but in the eagerness of men they killed old and young, male and female j little pups a few days old, deprived of their mothers, died by thousands on the beaches; carcasses and bones strewed the shores, and this productive fishery . was wholly destroyed. It is estimated that in the years 1821 and 1822 no less than 320,000 of these animals were killed at the Shetlands alone. An American captain, describing in after years his success there, says : ' We went the first year with one vessel and -got 1,200; the second year with two vessels, and obtained 30,000; the third year with six vessels, getting only 1,700—all there 'was left.' " A small rookery is still preserved at the lobos Islands, off the River La Plata; this, being carefully guarded under strict regulations by the Government of Buenos Ayres and rented to proper parties, yields about 5,000 skins per annum. As late as the year 1854 a small island, hardly a mile across, was discovered by Americans in the Japan Sea, where about 50,000 seals resorted annually. Traders visited it, and in three years the club and knife had cleaned them all off. Not 100 a season can now be found there." Honourable O. A. Williams, of Connecticut, who inherited the whaling and sealing business from his father and grandfather, speaking of the seal in the South Pacific, gave the following testimony before the Congressional Committee:— Hie history of sealing goes back to about 1790,. and from that to the early part of this century. In the earlier period of which I speak there were no seals known in the North Pacific Ocean. Their particular haunt was the South Atlantic. They were discovered by Cook, in his voyages, on the Island of Desolation; by Widdall, in his voyages to the South Pole, on the Island of South Georgia ■and Sandwichland; and by later voyagers, whose names escape me, in the islands of the South Pacific Ocean. When the number, of seals on those islands were first brought to the notice of British merchants, they pursued the hunting of these animals on the Island of Desolation. The most authentic authority we have about the matter is derived from reports made by these voyagers as to the number of seals taken from those places, and, although they are not entirely accurate, I think they are fully as accurate as could be expected, considering the lapse of time. On the Island of Desolation it is estimated that 1,200,000 fur-seals were taken; from the Island of South Georgia a like number were taken, and from the Island of Mas-a-Fuera probably a greater number were taken. As to the Sandwichland the statistics are not clear, but there can be no doubt that over 600,000 seals were taken from that locality, and in 1820 the Islands of South Shetland, south of Cape Horn, were discovered; and from these islands 320,000 fur-seals were taken in two years. There were other localities from which seals were taken, but no others where they were found in such, large numbers. * * * * * * The cause of the extermination of seals in those localities was the indiscriminate character of the slaughter. Sometimes as many as fifteen vessels would be hanging around these islands awaiting opportunity to get their catch, and every vessel would be governed by individual interests. They would kill everything that came in their way that furnished a skin, whether a cow, a bull, or a middle- grown seal, leaving the young pups just born to die from neglect and starvation. It was like taking a herd of cattle and killing all the bulls and cows and leaving the calves. The extermination was se complete in these localities, that the trade was-exhausted, and voyages to those places were abandoned About 1870, nearly fifty years after the discovery of the South Shetland Islands, when the occupation , of Alaska by the cession of Eussia to the United States of the Behring's Sea was brought about The Chairman.—I want to interrupt you to ask a Question bearing on that point. Were those rookeries in the South Seas never under the protectorate of any Government at all ? The Witness.—Never. I was going to say that when the cession was made by Russia to the United States of this territory, and the subject of the value of fur-seals, or the possible value, was brought to mind, people who had been previously engaged in that business revisited these southern localities after a lapse of nearly fifty years, and no seals were found on the Island of Desolation. - These islands have been used as the breeding-place for sea-elephants, and that creature cannot be exterminated on that island, for the reason that certain beaches known as " weather beaches " are there. The sea breaks rudely upon these beaches, and it is impossible to land upon them. There are cliffs, something like 300 to 500.feet, of shore ice, and the sea-elephant finds a safe resort on these beaches, and still preserves enough life to make the pursuit of that animal worth following in a small way. I have vessels there, and have had, myself and father, for fifty or sixty years. But this is •incidental. The Island of South Shetland, and the Island of South Georgia, and the Island of Sandwichland, and the Diegos, off Cape Horn, and one or two other minor points were found to yield more or less seal. In this period of fifty years in these localities seal life had recuperated to such an extent that there was taken from them in the six years from 1870 to 1876 or 1877 perhaps 40,000 skins. Q. After they had been abandoned for fifty years ?—A. Yes; to-day they are again exhausted. The last year's search of vessels in that region—I have the statistics here of a vessel from Stonington from the South Shetland Islands, reported in 1888, and she procured thirty-nine skins as the total result of search on those islands and South Georgia. One of my own vessels'procured sixty-one skins, including eleven pups, as the total result of her [128] vmrxmmm II Us ra flfl 'is.-' 426 voyage; and, except about Cape Horn, there are, in my opinion, no seals remaining. I do not think sthat 100 seals could he procured from all the localities mentioned by a close search Any one of thosfe localities I have named, under proper protection and restrictions, might have been perpetuated as a treeding-place for seals, yielding as great a number per annum as do the islands belonging to the United States. W$M^'~- Now, the trade in those localities is entirely exhausted, and it would be impossible in a century to- restock those islands, or hring them hack to a point where they would yield a reasonable return for .the investment of capital in hunting skins. That, in brief, completes the history of the fur-seal in the South Atlantic Ocean. Danger of the Bxtermination of the Alaska Rookeries. We have already mentioned that the present number of seals on St. Paul and St. George Islands- has materially diminished during the last two or three years. The testimony discloses the fact that a large number of British and American vessels, manned by expert Indian seal-hunters, have frequented Behring's Sea and destroyed hundreds of thousands of fur-seals by shooting them in the water, and securing as many of the carcases for their skins as they were able to take on board.. The testimony of the Government Agents shows that of the number of seals killed in the water not more than one in seven, on an average, is secured, for the reason that a wounded seal will sink in the sea; so that for every 1,000 sealskins secured in this manner there is a diminution of seal life at these rookeries of at least 7,000. Added to this is the fact that the shooting of a female seal with young causes the death of both. If the shooting is before delivery, that, of course, is the end of both; if after, the young se&I dies for want of sustenance. aS- ■;■■■ During the season of 1885 the number of contraband sealskins placed on the market was over 13,0001 and in 1886, 25,000; in 1887, 34,000; and in 1888 the number of illicit skins secured by British cruizers was less than -25,000, which number would have been largely increased had not the season been very stormy and boisterous. American citizens respected the law and the publisse'cl notice of the Secretary of the Treasury, and made no attempt to take seals. From this it appears that, during the last three years, the number of contraband sealskins placed 'on the market amounted to over 97,000, and which, according to the testimony, destroyed nearly 750,000 fur-seals, causing a loss of revenue anlounting'tb over 2,000,000 dollars, at the rate of tax arid Tental paid by the lessee of the Seal Islands. . ^ffes-j Limitation: the Lessee forbidden to kill any Female Seal. The following is an extract from the official Report to Congress :— The lessee is permitted to kill 100,000 fur-seals on St. Paul and St. George Islands, and no more, and is prohibited from lolling any female seal or any seal less than one year old, and from killing any far-seal at any time except during the months of June, July, September, and October, and from killing such seals by the use of fire-arms or other means tending to drive the seals from said islands, and from killing any seal in the water adjacent to said islands, or on the beaches, cliffs, or rocks where they haul up from the sea to remain Further extract from Report:— It is clear to your Committee, from the proof submitted, that to prohibit seal-killing on the Seal Islands, and permit the killing in Behring's Sea, would be no protection; for it is not on the islands where the destruction of seal life is threatened or seals are unlawfully killed, but it is in that part of Behring's Sea lying between the eastern and western limits of Alaska, as described in the Treaty bf Cession, through which the seals pass and repass in going to and from their feeding-grounds, some 50 miles south-east of the rookeries, and in their annual migrations to and from the islands. Extract from Report of L. -N. Buynitsky, Agent of the Treasury in 1870, to Honourable Geo. L. Boutwell, Secretary of the Treasury. It will be observed that this Report was made in 1870, before any dispute had arisen with the Canadian sealers:—- When the herd has been driven a certain distance from the shore a halt is made, and a sorting of the game as to age, sex, and condition of the fur is effected. This operation requires the exercise of a life-long experience, and is of the outmost importance, as the killing of females, which are easily mistaken for young males, even by the natives, would endanger the propagation of the species. The same witness, when not an employe- of the Treasury, gave testimony on another point in 1889 :— W%$. Q. 'Where are those seals born ? Where do the female seals give birth to their young ?—A. They are horn on the rookeries. Q. Are they an animal or a fish, or what are they; how do you classify them?—A. They are hot- blooded animals born on the land; they are not a fish. Q. And born on the United States' territory, are they ?—A. Yes; all those born on the Islands; of of St. Paul and St. George. Q. That is in United States' territory ?—A. Yes, Sir. " Fisheries" is a misnomer all the way througlfr, and always was. 427 <.■■; H, 'A. Glidden,, an. Agent of the Treasury Department, was ou the Bribyloy>. Islands from May 1882 to June 1885. In describing before the Congressional Committee the mode of killing seals by the lessee of the islands, the following: occurred:— .'• Q. Do they kill any females ?—A. They never kill females. I do not know of but one or two,, instances in my experience where a female seal was ever driven out with the crowd. ~t} .,•'. ****** Q. Do you believe seal life can be preserved without Government protection over them ?—A. I <le riot. W. B. Taylor, a Treasury Agent, was asked the same question as to the killing of female seals, and he said that " he had never known but one or two killed by the lessee on the islands, and they by accident." He was further asked as follows :— Q. When they kill the seals in the waters, about what proportion of them do they recover ?—A. I do not believe more than one-fourth of them. Q. The others sink ?—A. They shoot them and they sink. . .■ ■ Q. Have you ever noticed any wounded ones that came ashore that have been shot ?—A. No, Sir ; I do not think I did. The same witness testified as follows :— Q. You do not think, then, that the value of the seal fisheries and the seal rookeries could be preserved under an open policy ?—A. No, Sir; I do not. I think if you open it they will be destroyed without question. Q. Do you think it necessary to protect the seals in the sea and down in their feeding-grounds in the Pacific, if possible, in order to preserve their full value and the perpetuity of seal life ? Do you think they ought to be protected everywhere as well as on the rookeries ?—A. Yes, Sir; I think they ought to be protected not alone on the rookeries, but on the waters of the Behring's Sea. I do not think it is necessary to go outside of the Behring's Sea, because there is no considerable number of them. Q. Are they so dispersed in the Pacific that they would not be liable to destruction ?—A. Yes, Sir; they are scattered very much, and no hunters do much hunting in the Pacific, as I understand.' Another reason why they should be protected in all the waters of the Behring's Sea is this: a large number of seals that are on the islands of course eat a great many fish every twenty-four hours, and the fish have become well aware of the fact that there are a good many seal on the Seal Islands, and' they stpy out a longer distance from the islands, and they do not come near the shore. It becomes necessary for the seal themselves, the cows, to go a good distance into the sea in order to obtain food, and it is there where most of the damage is done by these vessels. They catch them while they' are out Q. So on the rookeries they go out daily for food ?—A. The cows go out every day for food. The- bulls do not go; they stay on the island all summer. The cows go 10 and 15 miles, and even further/' I do not know, the average of it, and they are going and coming all the morning and evening. The' sea is black with them round about, the islands. If there is a little fog and they get out half-a-mile from shore, we cannot see a vessel—100 yards even. The vessels themselves lay around the islands' there where they pick up a good many seal, and there is where the killing of cows occurs when they go' ashore. I think this is worse than it would be to take 25,000 more seal on the islands than are now taken. I think there is some damage done in the killing and shooting of the cows, and leaving so many young without their mothers. Q. Is it your opinion that a larger number of seals may be taken annually without detriment to the rookeries ?—A. No, Sir; I would not recommend that. The time may come, but I think that one year with another they are taking all they ought to take, for this reason: I believe that the capacity of the bull seal is limited, the same as any other animal, and I have, very frequently counted from thirty to thirty-five, and even, at one time, forty-two cows with one bull. I think if there were more bulls there would be less cows to one bull, and in that way the increase would be greater than now. While the number of seal in the aggregate is not apparently diminished, and, in fact, there is undoubtedly an increase, yet if you take any greater number of seal than is taken how, this ratio of cows to one bull would be greater, and for that reason there would be a less number of young ses^ls, undoubtedly. I look upon the breeding of the seal as something like the breeding o£ any other animal, and that the same care, and restriction, and judgment should be exercised in this breeding. The same witness testified as follows :— Q. What will be the effect upon the seal rookeries if this surreptitious and unlawful killing in the Behring's Sea is to be permitted ?—A. In my judgment, it would eventually exterminate the seal. >$ Mr. C. A. Williams, of Connecticut, before referred to, testified as follows :— Q. I would like to know—I do not know that it is just the proper time—but I would like to get the idea of those conversant with the habits and nature of the seal, as to what their opinion is upon the effect of the indiscriminate killing of them while they are coming to and going from the islands ?—■ A. That is a question which I think most any of us here can answer. If you note the conformation of [128] 3 12 428 the Aleution Islands, which form a wall, and note the gaps through which the seals come from the Pacific Ocean seeking the haunt on these islands, that is the whole point. When they come through these various passes, generally through the Oomnak Pass, the sea is reasonably shallow, and the cows come laden with pups, waiting until the last moment in the water to go ashore to deliver, because they can roll and scratch and help themselves better than if they haul out when heavy with pup, so they stay in the water playing about until their instinct warns them it is time to go ashore, and during thafr time they are massed in great quantities in the sea Q. Now, in that view of it, the destruction of them there is almost practically the same as the destruction on the islands ?—A. Yes, Sir. Q. And the conditions are as bad ?—A. Yes, Sir; and often worse, for this reason: If you kill a pup you destroy a single life, hut in killing a cow you not only destroy the life that may be, but the source from which life comes hereafter, and when they are killed there in the water by a shot-gun or a spear the proportion saved by the hunters is probably not one in seven. That was their own stimate; that out of eight shots they would save one seal and seven were lost. If they were killed n the land, those seven would go towards filling out their score. The same witness also testified as follows:— Q. Have you instructed your agents to comply strictly with the Laws and Regulations of the Treasury Department 1—A. In every case; yes. Q. Do you kill seals with fire-arms at the islands, or do you prohibit that ?—A. No, Sir, never; it is not allowed by the Act. Q. Do you kill the female seals or allow them to be killed ?—A. Never with our knowledge. Q. Do you kill any during the month of August for their skins ?—A. Not a seal; no. Q. Do you kill any seals under 2 years old ?—A. Not that we' are aware of. The same witness further testified:— Q. Now, I would like to have your opinion as to the insufficiency of the present measures taken' by the Government for the protection of the rookeries, and your opinion as to whether any additional safeguards are necessary for their protection.—A. That the present measures are somewhat insufficient is shown by the fact that for the last three or four years there have been increased depredations annually upon the rookeries. More seals are taken within the limits of Behring's Sea. Formerly seals were only taken outside of Behring's Sea as they passed up to British Columbia, and off the mouth of Puget Sound, in the waters of the Pacific Ocean. That was a legitimate place to take them, and one against which no objection could be raised. Seals which come up that way enter through the passages of the Aleutian Islands nearest to the mainland, and it has always been the custom in British Columbia and our Sound to intercept the seal and get what they could. Within the last two or three years marauders have followed them through the passages into Behring's Sea, and have with guns and spears taken the seals as they lay upon the water, as I stated before, waiting to haul ashore and have their pups. The cows are heavy with pup, and they do not like to go ashore until the last moment,' and so they lie there in the water, and this affords an opportunity for these marauders to shoot and spear them. This is done by gangs of Indians which they have. They hire gangs of Indians and take them with them. The effects of this shooting is not alone upon the seals which are at that point, but also upon those all around, and it startles them and raises a suspicion in their minds, and there is a general feeling of disturbance such as you notice among cattle when bears are aboxit or something of that kind. And again:— Q. Now, Mr. Williams, should it be finally ascertained and considered by our Government that, under the Treaty of Cession by which we acquired Alaska from Russia, and under the law of nations, the United States does possess and has absolute dominion and jurisdiction over Behring's Sea and the waters of Alaska, would you think it would be a wise policy to adhere to and maintain that jurisdiction and dominion complete, or would it be wiser to declare it the high sea in the legal sense ?—A. In the light of to-day I should say keep what you have got. Q. Hold it as a closed sea ?—A. Fisheries within those limits are yet to be developed, and it would seem to be very unwise to open up possible fishery contentions which are very likely to arise by such a course. Q. You think that would be, then, the wiser policy to maintain such jurisdiction and dominion as we have, and to concede to the vessels of other nations such rights as are not inconsistent with the interests which our nation has there and which need protection ?—A. Exactly that; the right of transit through the sea wherever they please, but positive protection to seal life. Q. You do not think it would be wise to grant anything else ?—A. No, Sir; not at all. Q, And in no case to surrender the power of policing the sea ?—A. No, Sir; under no circumstances. Q. Could that power and jurisdiction be surrendered and yet preserve this seal life on these rookeries and the value of our fisheries that may be developed there ?—A. Only with very great risk, because, if that right is surrendered, and thereby the right to police the sea, the depredations that are made upon the seal wherever they may be found, wherever men thought they could carry them out without being taken in the act, would be carried out. So it would be difficult in regard to the fisheries. Wherever they could kill these seals they certainly would be there, and it would be impossible to prevent them. 429 In the statements and C. A. Williams in 18S8 to statistics relative to the fur-seal fisheries submitted by the Committee of Consrress on Merchant Marine and Fisheries. appears the folio wring Examination of the earliest records of the fur-seal fishery shows that from the date of man's, recognition of the value of the fur the pursuit of the animal bearing it has been unceasing and relentless. Save in the few instances to be noted hereafter, where Governments have interposed for the purpose of protecting seal life, having in view benefits to accrue in the future, the animal has been wantonly slaughtered, with no regard for age, sex, or condition. The mature male, the female heavy with young, the pup, dependent for life on the mother, each and all have been indiscriminately killed or left to die of want. This cruel and useless butchery has resulted in complete extermination of the fur-seal from localities which were once frequented by .millions of the species; and, so far as these localities are concerned, has obliterated an industry which a little more enlightened selfishness might have preserved in perpetuity to the great benefit of all ranks of civilized society. Nothing less than stringent laws, with will power to enforce them against all violators, can preserve for man's benefit the. remnant of a race of animals so interesting and so useful. The most valuable " rookery," or breeding-place, of these animals ever known to man is now in the possession of the United States. How it has been cared for in former years and brought to its present state of value and usefulness will be shown later on. But the matter of its preservation and perpetuation intact is the important question of the moment, and that this question may be considered intelligently the evidence is here presented of the wanton destruction that has befallen these animals. when left unprotected by the law to man's greed and selfishness, which, it is fair to say, is all that. could be expected from the unlicensed hunter, whose nature seeks individual and immediate gain; with no regard for a future in which he has no assurance of personal advantage. The following statistics are gathered from the journals of early navigators, and such commercial records as are now available are submitted. Kerguelen Land.—An island in Southern Indian Ocean, discovered about 1 it* The shores of this island were teeming with fur-seal when it first became known. Between the date of its discovery and the year 1800 over 1,200,000 seal-skins were taken by the British vessels from the island, and seal life thereon was exterminated. Crozetts.—The Crozetfc Islands, in same ocean and not far distant, were also visited and hunted over and the seal life there totally exhausted Mas-a-Fuera.—An island in Southern Pacific Ocean, latitude 38° 48' south, longitude 80° 34' west, came next in order of discovery, and from its shores in a few years were gathered and shipped 1,200,000 fur-seal skins. Delano, chapter 17, p. 306, says of Mas-a-Fuera:— " When the Americans came to this place in 1797 and began to make a business of killing seals, there is no doubt but there- were 2,000,000 or 3,000,000 of them on tbe island. I have made an estimate of more than 3,000,000 that have been carried to Canton from thence in the space of seven years. I hare carried more than 100,000 myself, and have been at the place when there were the people of fourteen ships or vessels on the island at one time killing seals." South Shetlands.—In 1821-23 the South Shetland Islands, a group nearly south from Cape Horn, became known to the seal-hunters, and in two years over 320,000 seals were killed and their skins shipped from these islands. South Georgia.—Later still, seal were found on the Island of South Georgia, South Atlantic Ocean, and from this locality was obtained over 1,000,000 of fur-seal, leaving the beaches bare of seal life. Cape Horn.—From the coasts of South America and about Cape Horn many thousands of fur-seal have been taken, and of the life once so prolific there nothing is now left save such remnants of former herds as shelter on rocks and islets almost inaccessible to the most daring hunter. This record shows the nearly complete destruction of these valuable animals in southern seas. Properly protected, Kerguelen Land, Mas-d-Fuera, the Shetlands, and South Georgia might have been hives of industry, producing vast wealth, training-schools for hardy seamen, and furnishing employment for tens of thousands in the world's markets where skins are dressed, prepared, and distributed." But the localities were no man's land, and no man cared for them or their products save as through destruction they could be transmitted into a passing profit. The seal life of to-day available for commercial purposes is centred in three localities:— 1. The Lobos Islands, situated in the mouth of the River La Plata, owned and controlled by the Uruguay Republic, and by that Government leased to private parties for the sum of 6,000 dollars per annum and some stipulated charges. The annual product in skins is about 12,000. The skins are of rather inferior quality. Insufficient restrictions are placed upon the lessees in regard to the number of skins permitted to be taken annually, consequently there is some waste of life; nevertheless, the measure of protection allowed has insured the preservation of the rookery, and will continue so to do. 2. Komandorski Couplet, which consists of the Islands of Copper and Behring, near the coast of Kamchatka, in that portion of Behring's Sea pertaining to Russia. These islands yield about 40,000 skins per annum, of good quality, and are guarded by carefully restrictive Rules as to the killing of seal, analogous to the Statutes of the United States relative to the same subject. The right to take seata upon them is leased by the Russian Government to an Association of American citizens, who also hold the lease of the islands belonging to the United States, and are thus enabled to control and direct the business in fur-seal skins for the common advantage and benefit of all parties in interest. These islands can hardly be said to have been " worked " at all for salted sealskins prior to the cession of Alaska by Russia to the United States, and the United States' Government now profits by the industry to the extent of the duty of 20 per cent, collected on the " dressed skins" returned il 430 !■: po this country from the London market. From 1878 to 1887, inclusive, this return has been 121,275 skins. , 3. The Pribylov group consists of the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, and is a Government reservation in that part of Behring's Sea ceded to the United States by Russia, together with and a part of Alaska So exhaustive an account of these islands and their seal life has been given by Mr. H. W. Elliott, Special Agent of the Treasury Department in 1874, and since intimately connected with the Smithsonian Institution, which account has been made a part of Tenth Census Report, that it would be intrusive here to attempt to supplement aught, and therefore only generalizations based on said Report a*nd such statements of life and procedure on the islands to-day are presented as may be pertinent in this connection. In an article on fur-seals which appeared in "Land and Water," July 14, 1877, Mr. Henry Lee (Englishman), E.L.S., says :— It has been stated that during a period of fifty years not less than 20,000 tons of sea-elephant's oil, worth more than 1,000,000Z., was annually obtained from New Georgia, besides an incalculable number of fur-seal skins, of which we have no statistics. Some idea may be had of their numbers in former years when we learn that on the Island of Mas-a-Fuera, on the coast of Chile (an island not 25 miles in circumference), Captain Fanning, of the American ship "Betsy," obtained in 1798 a full crop of choice skins, and estimated that there were left on the island at least 500,000 seals. Subsequently there were taken from this island little short of 1,000,000 skins. The seal catching was extensively prosecuted there for many years, the sealing fleet on the coast of Chile alone then numbering thirty vessels. From Desolation Island, also discovered by Cook, and the South Shetlands; discovered bv Weddell, the number of skins taken was at least as great; froni the latter alone 320,000 were shipped during the two years 1821 and 1822. China was the great market to which they were? sent, and there the price for each skin was from 4 to 6 dollars. As several thousand tons of shipping, chiefly English and American, were at that time employed in fur-seal catching, the profits of the early traders were enormous. Does the reader ask what has become of this extensive and highly remunerative southern fur trade ? It has been all but annihilated by maris grasping greed, reckless improvidence, and wantojr cruelty. The " woeful want" has come that " woeful waste " has made. Without thought of the, future the misguided hunters persistently killed every seal that came within their reach. Old and young, male and female, were indiscriminately slaughtered, in season and out of season, and thousands of little pups not thought worth the trouble of knocking them on the head were left to die of hunger1 alongside of the flayed and gory carcases of their mothers. Every coast and island known to be the haunt of the seals was visited by ship after ship, and the massacre left unfinished by one gang was1 continued by the next comers and completed by others until,, in consequence of none of the animals being left to breed, their number gradually diminished so that they were almost exterminated, only a few stragglers remaining where millions were once found. In some places where formerly they gathered together in such densely packed crowds upon the shore that a boat's crew could not find room to land till they had dispersed them for a space with oars and boat-hooks, not one fur-seal was to be found even so long ago as 1835. Wnt. Spi- Dr. H. H. Mclntyre, Superintendent of the seal fisheries of Alaska for the lessees, testified before the Congressional Committee as follows:— £||-: Q. What proportion of the seals shot in the water are recovered and the skins taken to market ?— A. I think not more than one-fifth of those shot are recovered. Many are badly wounded and escape, We find every year, imbedded in blubber of animals killed upon the islands, large quantities of bullets, shot, and buckshot. Last year my men brought to me as much as a double handful of lead found by them imbedded in this way. ****** Q. I want to ask you whether or not the 3-year-old seals, or many of them, which should have returned this year did not return because they had been kdled ?—A. That seems to be the case. The marauding was extensively carried on in 1885 and 1886, and in previous years, and of course the pups that would have been born from cows that were killed in 1885, or that perished through the loss of their mothers during that year, would have come upon the islands in 1S88, and we should have had that additional number from which to make our selection this year. The deficiency this year is attributed to that cause—to the fact that the cows were killed. And I would say further that if cows are killed late in the season, say in August, after the pups are born, the latter are left upon the island deprived of the mother's care, and of course perish. The effect is the same whether the cows are killed before or after the pups are dropped. The young perish in either case. ****** Q. It being conceded that the islands are their home, and no one being interested other than the American and Russian Governments, there would be no special reason why other nations would object?—A. Only the Governments of the United States and England are interested in the Alaskan seal fisheries to any great extent. The United States is interested in it as a producer of raw material, and England as a manufacturer of furs. If these two nations were agreed that seal life should be protected, I think there would be no trouble in fully -protecting it. It is a question of quite as much interest to England as to the United States, for she has a large number of skilled workmen and a large amount of capital engaged in this industry. Professor Elliott, of the Smithsonian Institution, who has spent some time in scientifically examining the Seal Islands and the habits of the seal, thus describes the killing power of the seal-hunter at sea i— 1$ 431 I His power to destroy them is also augmented by the fact that those seals which are most liable to meet his eye and aim are the female fur-seals, which, heavy with young, are here slowly nearing the land, soundly sleeping at sea by intervals, and reluctant to haul out from the cool embrace of the water upon their breeding-grounds until that day, and hour even, arrives which limits the period of their gestation. The pelagic sealer employs three agencies with which to secure his quarry; viz.: He sends out Indians with canoes from his vessel armed with spears; he uses shot-guns and buck-shot, rifles and balls; and last, but most deadly and destructive of all, he can spread the " gill-net" in favourable weather. With gill-nets " underrun " by a fleet of sealers in Behring's Sea across these converging paths of the fur-seal, anywhere from 10 to 100 miles southerly from the Pribylov group, I am moderate in saying that such a fleet could utterly ruin and destroy those fur-seal rookeries now present upon the Seal Islands in less time than three or four short years. Every foot of that watery roadway of fur-seal travel, above indicated, if these men were not checked, could and would be traversed by those deadly nets; and a seal coming from or • going to the islands would have, under the water and above it, scarcely one chance in ten of safely passing such a cordon. Open those waters of Behring's Sea to unchecked pelagic sealing, then a fleet of hundreds of vessels, steamers, ships, schooners, and what not, would immediately venture into them, bent upon the most vigorous and indiscriminate slaughter of these fur-seals; a few seasons of greediest rapine, then nothing would be left of those wonderful and valuable interests of our Government which are now so handsomely embodied on the Seal Islands; but which, if guarded and conserved as they are to-day, will last for an indefinite time to come as objects of the highest commercial good and value to the world, and as subjects for the most fascinating biological study. Shooting fur-seals in the open waters of the sea or ocean with the peculiar shot and bullet cartridges used involves an immense wjtste of seal life. Every seal that is merely wounded, and even if mortally wounded at the moment of shooting, dives and swims away instantly, to perish at some point far distant, and to be never again seen by its human enemies; it is ultimately destroyed, but ft islost, in so far as the hunters are concerned. If the seal is shot dead instantly, killed instantly, then it can be picked up in most every case; but not one seal in ten fired at by the most skilful marine hunters is so shot, and nearly every seal in this ten will have been wounded, many of them fatally. The irregular tumbling of the water around the seal, and the irregular heaving of the hunter's boat, both acting at the same moment entirely independent of each other, making the difficulty of taking an. accurate aim exceedingly great, and the Tesult of clean killing very slender. Mr. George H. Tingle, United States' Treasury Agent in charge of the fur-seal islands from April 1885 until August 1886, testified as follows : — Q. It is Mr. Mclntyre's opinion that they have not only not increased, but have decreased ?— A. There has been a slight diminution of seals, probably. Q. To what do you attribute that ?—A. I think there have been more seals killed in the sea than ever before by marauders. I estimated that they secured 30,000 skins in 1887, and in order to secure that number of skins they would have had to kill 500,000 seals, while this Company in taking 100,000 on shore destroyed only thirty-one seals. Those were killed by accident. Sometimes a young seal, or one not intended to be killed, pops up his head and gets a blow unintentionally. Q. The waste of seal life was only fifty-three in 1887 ?—A. Yes, Sir; in securing 100,000 skins, while these marauders did not kill last year less than 500,000. The logs of marauding schooners have fallen into my hands, and .they have convinced me that they do not secure more than one seal out of every ten that they mortally wound and kill, for the reason that the seals sink very quickly in the water. Allowing one out of ten, there would be 300,000 that they would kill in getting 30,000 skins; 200,000 of those killed would be females having 200,000 pups on shore. Those pups would die by reason of the death of their mothers, which, added to the 300,000, makes 500,000 destroyed I am : inclined to think, because; the seals show they are not increasing, or rather that they are at a standstill, that more than 300,000 are killed by marauders. Q. You are of the opinion, then, that the marauders are killing more seals than the Alaska Commercial Company ?—A. At least five or six times as many as the Alaska Commercial Company are killing. Q. What will be the effect if more stringent measures are not taken to protect the seals .by the Government ?—A. If more stringent measures are not taken, it is only a question of time when these seals will be driven ultimately to seek some other home where they will not be molested. They will not r.continue to be harassed; and, if this marauding is continued, they will, in my opinion, either be ^gradually exterminated, or will leave • the islands permanently and land at some other place. They i may go on the Russian side. Q. Will marauding increase if the Government does not take steps to prevent it ?—A. I think so. Q. Is it practicable to prevent it ?—A. Yes, Sir. If we did not allow these cheeky, persistent, insolent British Columbia seamen to go there and defy the United States and its authorities, it would very-soon be stopped. When our revenue-cutters seize the British schooners, the captains are very insolent and defiant, and claim that they liave a strong Government at their backs. I am now referring ■ particularly to Captain Warner, of the "Dolphin." He said in 1887, when captured, "We ha^e got a ! strong Government at our backs, and we will fight you on this question." " Very well," says Captain Shepherd, " I have got a strong Government at my back, and I am going to do my duty. My Government sends me to protect these seal rookeries. I am charged by this Administration to enforce the law, and I will seize all marauders." ****** 432 ■■ Q. You were speaking a while ago in regard to the amount of seal life destroyed by marauders, and that a captain had given the number of seals destroyed. Have you seen any of the log-books of those vessels ?—A. Yes, Sir. . Q. Will you state what you remember with regard to the number of seals lost or captured by those vessels ?—A. I remember reading the log-book of the " Angel Dolly," which I captured. There wap an entry in that log-book that read as follows: " Issued to-day to my boats 300 rounds of ammunition. At night they came in with the ammunition all expended, and one seal-skin." Q. They had shot 300 rounds of ammunition?—^. Yes, Sir. Another entry I saw was: "Seven seals shot from the deck, but only secured one." All lost but one. Another entry: "It is very discouraging to issue a large quantity of ammunition to your boats, and have so few seals returned," An entry was made in another place, where he gave it as his opinion that he did not secure one seal- •skin out of every fifty seals wounded and killed. Q. Have you seen seal-skins upon the island that had been shot?—A. Very often. We gather handfuls of shot every season. Q. Does that injure the market value of the skins ?—A. Undoubtedly. Any hole is an injury to the skin. § I afttsiH ■• Extract from Mr. Tingle's Report to the Treasury Department:— I am now convinced from what I gather, in questioning the men belonging to captured schooners ,and from reading the logs of the vessels, that not more than one seal in ten killed and mortally wounded is landed on the boats and skinned; thus you will see the wanton destruction of seal life without any benefit whatever. I think 30,000 skins taken this year by the marauders is a low estimate on this basis ; 300,000 fur-seals were killed to secure that number, or three times as many as the Alaska Commercial Company are allowed by law to kill. You can readily see that this great slaughter of seals will in a few years make it impossible for 100,000 skins to be taken on the islands by the lessees. I earnestly hope more vigorous measures will be adopted by the Government in dealing with these destructive law-breakers. William Gavitt, an Agent of the United States' Treasury, gave this testimony:— Q. I understand you to say—for instance, taking 1887 or 1888—that the 100,000 seals taken upon the islands and the 40,000 taken and killed in the water, if no greater amount was taken, that there would be no perceptible diminution in the number of seal; that by the natural increase the Company might take 40,000 more than now if it. were not for the depredations ?—A. I had in mind an average between 25,000 killed in 1888 and about 40,000 in 1887. Q. What I want to know is this: Is it your opinion that the number taken in the sea, when they are on the way from the islands to the feeding-grounds, have a tendency to demoralize the seal and to -hreak up their' habits, their confidence, &c. ?—A. It would be likely to do it. They are very easily frightened, and the discharge of fire-arms has a tendency to frighten them away. By Mr. MacDonald: Q. No seals are killed by the Company in this way ?- ■ islands with clubs. -A. No, Sir; they are all killed on the Jacob H. Moulton, an Agent of the Government, testified :— Q. Do you think it essential to the preservation of seal life to protect the.seal in the waters of Alaska and the Pacific ?—A. There is no doubt about it. Q. The herd could be exterminated without taking them upon, the islands?—A. They could be, ' exterminated by a system of marauding in the Behring's Sea, Taut I think the number killed along the British Columbia coast did not affect the number we were killing on the islands ^at that time, because there was apparently an increase during these years. There had been for five or six years up to that tine. Since that time in Behring's Sea the seal have been gradually decreasing. Q. You think their decrease is attributable to unlawful hunting in Behring's Sea ?—A. There is no doubt of that. Q. As a result of your observation there, could you suggest any better method of preserving seal life in Behring's Sea than that now adopted ?—A. Not unless they furnished more revenue-vessels and men-of-war. Q. So as to patrol the sea closely ?—A. I think so. I do not think the seals scatter much through any great distance during the summer season, although very late in the summer the smaller seals arrive. The females, after giving birth to their young, scatter out in Behring's Sea for food. We know they leave the islands to go into the water, because they are coming and going. They suckle their young the same as most animals. Q. Lawless hunters kill everything they find, I believe, females or not ?—A. Yes, Sir. $. When a female is nursing her young and goes out for food and is killed or wounded, that results also in the death of her young ?—A. Yes, Sir. As her young does not go into the water, it does not do anything for some time, and cannot swim and has to be taught. Q. The seals are born upon those islands?—A. Yes, Sir; they come there for that purpose. They come there expressly to breed, because if they dropped their young in the water the pup would drown. ; Q. Do you think the value of the seals justifies the policy that the Government pursues for their preservation and protection ?—A. Yes, Sir; I do. Q. And under a rigidly enforced system protecting seal life in the waters of these seas do you 433 think the herd could be materially increased ?■—A. I think it would, what it would. . I think there is no doubt but Edward Shields, of Vancouver Island, a sailor on board the British schooner | Caroline," engaged in seal-hunting in Behring's Sea in 1886, testified, after the vessel was seized, that the 686 seals taken during the whole time they were cruizing in the open sea were chiefly females. Mr. H. A. Glidden, Treasury Agent, recalled, testified as follows :— Q. From the number of skins taken you estimated the number killed ?—A. That season I know there were thirty-five vessels in the sea, and we captured fifteen vessels. The catches of the vessels were published in the papers when they arrived home, and averaged from 1,000 to 2,500 skins each. Q. You estimate, then, that during the season 40,000 skins were taken ? In killing them in the open sea they doinot recover every seal they kill ?—A. No, Sir; I do not think they do. In fact, I know they do not, judging from the amount of shot and lead taken from the seals that are afterwards killed on St. Paul and St. George Islands. Q. So that the destruction of the seals in the open sea would be much in excess of the number taken, probably ?—A. I have no very accurate information on which to base an opinion, but I should judge that they lost from 40 to 60 per cent, of them. I saw a good many shot from the boats as I was approaching, and think they lost two or three out of five or six that I saw them shoot at. Q. From your observations have you any recommendations or suggestions to offer, the adoption of . which would lead to the better preservation' of seal life" in these waters than is now provided by law ?— A. There is a difference of opinion -as to the construction of the law. I firmly believe that the Government should either protect the islands and water in the eastern half of Behring's Sea or throw up their interest there. If the Behring's Sea is to be regarded as open for vessels to go in and capture seals in the water, they woidd be exterminated in a short time. Synopsis of Reply to Mr. Blaine's Letter to Sir J. Pauncefote of March 1, 1890. Mr. Blaine's reference to indiscriminate slaughter—note in point ... ... 436 Extraordinary productiveness of seals ... ... ... ... ... 436 Rookeries in South Pacific withheld extensive raids for years ... ... ... 436 None of Pacific fisheries ever equalled those of the Pribylov group ... ... 436 History of South Shetland Islands, and wholesale destruction thereon ... ... 436 Destruction at Mas-a-Fuera ... ... ... ... ... ... 436- Chapel of opinion that 100,000 a-year eoidd have been taken from the Shetlands under proper restrictions ... ... ... ... ... ... 43 & Pups in thousands found dead on beaches ... ... ... ... ... 436 Incorrect statement in Report of the House of Representatives as to rookeries of the world ... ... ... ... ... ... .... 436 Russian Memorandum of July 25, 1888, enumerating rookeries ... ... 437 Cape of Good Hope rookeries, and the protection of same ... ... ... 437 Destruction on these rookeries formerly—plague—revival of rookeries under regulations. Seals shot—statement that one only in seven is shot—contradicted by Canadian hunters ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 437 Mr. Elliott on unerring aim of Indian hunters ... ... ... ... 437 Practice of hunters ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 437 Statement of facts prior to and at time lease of islands to Alaska Commercial Company (1870)—lessees permitted to take 100,000 a-year ... ... 437 Slaughter under Russian rule ... ... ... ... ... ... 437 Table showing catch, 1817-60' ... ... ... ... ... ... 437 Undiminished condition of islands, 1868, though 6,000,-000 taken 1841-70 ... 438 50,000 seals lolled on the Island of St. George in 1808 ... ... ... 438 150,000 killed on the Island of St. Paul during the same year... ... ... 438 General onslaught— 300,000 lolled in 1869... ... ... ... ... 438 Notwithstanding the above destruction, 100,000 a-year might, Mr. Boutwell stated, be killed with protection in and around the islands Mr. Dall of same opinion in 1870 (100,000 a-year may safely be killed)... Tenure of lease allowed 100,000 a-year—any male seal of one year or over— natives to kill pups for food ... Opinion of Committee of House of. Representatives that seals require protection during migration, and for 50 miles south-east of rookeries while searching for food, which differs from Mr. Blaine's proposition ... ... ... 43 Mr. Gliddeu's testimony—merely his opinions, not based ori practical knowledge ... 43 Mr. Taylor's testimony ... ... ... ... ... ... ... 43 On islands in 1881—as to seals' intelligence and hours for feeding. No bulls remain on islands all summer—writers arid agents "contradict this ... 43 Mr. Taylor admits that killing occurs inshore, where the sea is black with seals ... 43 This witness, while stating that young pups are lost, does not instance finding dead pups on the islands—his admission that seals have not diminished. [128] 3 K. 438 438 438 'iml 11 434 Chief damage due to insufficient protection of islands Mr. Williams' testimony No personal knowledge as to the seal—refers to want of protection on islands and danger of seals being taken when passing Aleutian Islands—increased depredations upon the rookeries for last three or four years. Mr. Molntyre, Government Agent, afterwards a Superintendent for the Company... Thinks one-fifth only of seals shot are recovered—found seals with shot— attributes deficiency of seals in 1888 to the fact that cows were killed— attempts to reduce estimate, as to number, of Elliott and Dall by one-half —large decrease in 1887-88—decrease since 1882, especially since 1884— considerable percentage of killed made up of males—40,000 skins in 1886 and 1887 taken in Behring's Sea—this merely a surmise—80 or 90 per cent, of catch females—positive testimony of this witness on matters of opinion or hearsay—his statement that islands unmolested from 1870 to 1885 incorrect, as well as statement as to decrease from 1882 and 1884. Mr. Elliott's testimony ... Report regarding him by Mr. Morris in 1879—Mr. Elliott's evidence before Congressional Committee goes further than his previous writings—his statement regarding loss of wounded seals contradicted. Mr. Tingle's testimony ... On islands, 1885 to 1886—slight diminution probably—calculation of catch from entry in log of " Angel Dolly "—extraordinary log and extraordinary crew of " Angel Dolly "—Mr. Tingle contradicts Mr. Mclntyre—increase since Mr. Elliott's count, 1876, 2,137,000—criticism of Mr. Elliott's statement re decrease, and points out that Mr. Elliott was not on the islands for fourteen years. Mr. W. Gavitt's testimony On St. George Island, 1887-88—bad character of employes of Company—no means of Agents knowing of unlawful killing—no agent can say when seals are captured off the islands—lessees buy seals killed at Ounalaska— Agents drawing two salaries, one from Government and one from the Company. Mr. Moulton's testimony, 1877-85 Increase in number seals to 1882—decrease to 1885—opinion and evidence as to catch of mothers. Edward Shields, sailor, as to catch of 686 seals, chiefly females—custom of hunters to class all skins of seals under those of mature seals as females.... Mr. Glidden, recalled, based his estimate of 40,000 catch from newspapers Inexperience of witnesses No cross- examination of witnesses The opinions of witnesses Their opinions are substantially that females nursing go out for food—when away from islands are shot-—greater part of catch in Behring's Sea made up of females—many of the seals shot are lost. Issue joined on these by Canadian Government. Seals can be protected and increased in number by (1) proper patrol of islands ; (2) killing of pups prohibited ; (3) reduction of pups to be killed on islands; (4) limit of months for killing; (5) prevention of killing by Aleuts at the Aleutian Islands Difference between House of Representatives' Committee and Mr. Blaine as to when injury began to islands—1886 or 1885 Important to show how insignificant catch of Canadian sealers compared with depredations successfully survived by islands Depredations on islands and catch outside islands— 1870 1872 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 None of the depredations were committed by Canadian sealers Mr. Blaine refers to increase and profitable pursuit of industry down to 1886 ^resent value and condition of islands better than ever :omparative offers for lease of islands, 1870-90 Page. 439 439 440 440 441 442 442 442 442 442 442 443 443 443 443 443 443 443 443 443 443 443 443 444 444 444 444 444 444 444 445 445 445 445 435 Enormous rental and profits received by United States from the islands ... Receipts and expenses—9,525,283 dollars received by the United States in excess of purchase price of Alaska... ... ... Marvellous increase of seals in spite of depredations referred to 1869,1,728,000—1874, 4,700,000—1884, increasing—1885, no change; countless numbers—1887, still on the increase—-1.888, no change. With total of 4,700,000 in 1874, Lieutenant Maynard of opinion 112,000 young male seals can be safely killed annually ... ... ... Reference to Maynard's and Bryant's Report as to habits of seals supports Canadian contention Canadian Government contends few females in calf ever taken in sea ... More females in a herd than males Canadian contention supported by following facts: (1) seals on rookeries still' ■ increasing; (2) old bulls go into water at end of rutting season and do not return to islands^-Clark on males driving others off; (3) two-thirds of males not permitted to land at rookeries—occasional visits to land—yearlings arrive middle July—non-breeding male seals equal breeding seals (1,500,000)— bachelors not long on shore—females do not feed until young go into water ... Bulk of seals confined to island until ice surrounds islands Never eat until departure (see Mr. Mclntyre's Report, p. 448)... Bulls prevent mothers taking to water ... ... ... ... Rookeries full to July 25, and remain in limits ... ... No seals sick or dying on islands ... Canadian contention supported by Report on International Fisheries Exhibition (London, 1883)—Nature has imposed a limit to their destruction ... Mr. Elliott, in 1874, agrees with the above contention—the equilibrium of life regulated... Seals get their fish in North Pacific ... ... Mr. Mclntyre's Report as to habits of seals, 1869 Seals take no food until their departure from islands in November The duty of Government to patrol islands—Mr. Tingle in 1886 asks for cutters to patrol islands—Mr. Morgan recommends launches—Mr. Wardman alludes to inadequacy of protection to islands ... ... ... Mr. Williams points out insufficiency of protection to islands ... Mr. Taylor says, in 1881, the difficulty arises from the want of better protection— Mr. Glidden agrees Mr. Boutwell, Secretary of the Treasury, in 1870, conceived the duty of the Government was to efficiently guard "in and around the islands" ... ■ The interests on behalf of a monopoly cause divergent views respecting the protection of seals... Mr. Bryant shows the value of the lease in conferring a monopoly—Mr. Moore illustrates this When the Company took less than 100,000 seals it did so because the market did not demand them ... Mr. Mclntyje shows, that 800,000 were once thrown into the sea as worthless when the market was glutted Eliller-whales and sharks the enemies of seals ... ... ... ... Man's assaults at sea small in comparison to the natural enemies of the seal Canadian system of hunting Mr. Elliott shows that if temporary diminution does occur on the Islands of St. Paul and St. George, the missing seals are probably on the Russian islands Page. 445 445 445 446 446 446 446 446 447 447 447 447 447 447 447 447 448 448 448 448 448 448 449 449 449 450 450 450 450 450 Mr. Tupper to Sir J. Pauncefote. Dear Sir Julian, The Arlington, Washington, March 8, 1890. I have the honour to inclose herewith a Memorandum prepared by me in reply to the Memorandum sent to you by Mr. Blaines and which you handed to me upon the 3rd instant. I send you a copy for yourself, one for Mr. Blaine, and one for M. de Struve, the Russian Ambassador. I also have the honour to forward herewith a valuable paper upon the subject, prepared hurriedly by the Assistant Director of the Geological Survey of Canada, George Dawson, D.S., E.G.S., E.R.S.C, E.R.M.S. I may add that Dr. Dawson was in charge of the Yukon Expedition in 1887. Copies of his paper are also inclosed for Mr. Blaine and M. de Struve. I am, &c. (Signed) CHARLES H. TUPPER. [128] 3 K 2 436 Mil III Memorandum on Mr. Blaine's Letter to Sir Julian Pauncefote, dated March 1, 1890. In the Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter of the 1st March, on the third page, is an extract from a Report to the House of Representatives, as follows :—-... " In former years fur-seals were found In great numbers on various islands of the South Pacific Ocean, but after a comparatively short period of indiscriminate slaughter the rookeries were deserted, the animals having been killed or driven from their haunts/1 While it is admitted that indiscriminate slaughters upon the rookeries are most injurious to the maintenance of'seal life, it- is denied that in the history of the fur-seal industry any instance can be' found where a rookery has ever been destroyed, depleted, or even injured by the killing of seals at sea only. ••• ••• Mr. Elliott, who is quoted by Mr. Blaine, admits that the rookeries in the South Pacific withstood attacks of the most extensive and destructive character for twenty years, when young and old males and females were indiscriminately knocked on the head upon their breeding-grounds ; and Mr. Clark (H. R. Report No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 91) tells us that in 1820 thirty vessels on the islands (South Shetlands) took in a few weeks 250,000 skins, while thousands were killed and lost. In 1821 and 1822, 320,000 skins were taken, and 150,000 young seals destroyed. None of these islands, however, were ever frequented by the millions which have been found on the Pribylov group for over twenty years. "These islands constitute the most valuable rookery or breeding-place of these animals ever known to man/' (H. R, Report 3883, 50th Congress, pp. Ill, 112, Hon. C A. Williams' written statement.) Professor Elliott (in his evidence, p. 142) mentions one person who, when with him at the islands, estimated the number at 16,000,000.- The Eeport of the Congressional Committee on the Alaska seal fisheries states that indiscriminate slaughter in the-early part of the nineteenth century caused a desertion of the rookeries, and it goes on to say that in 1820 and 1821, 300,000 were taken in an indiscriminate fashion at the South Shetlands, and, at the end-of the seeond year,-the species-had there been almost exterminated: The Honourable C. A- Williams, whose- -evidence is cited and relied upon by Mr. Blaine, supports this view (see p.-Ill, H. -R-. Report No. 3883, 50th Congress); but, as a matter of fact, while seals are admittedly not so plentiful in South Shetlands as heretofore, owing to wholesale destruction on the breeding-grounds, so prolific are they that, in 1872, 8,000 skins of " the choicest and richest quality were obtained from these islands. In the next season 15,000 skins were taken there, and in 1874, 10,000 skins, and from 18-70 to 1880 the sealing fleet brought home 92,756 fur-seal skins from the South Shetlands, and the vicinity of Cape Horn and Tierra del Euego." (A. Howard Clark, p. 402, Commission of Eisheries, Eishery Industries United States, section 5, vol! ii, 1887.) In this regard, it may here be noted that this -extract refers only to the catch of sealers which fitted out at New London, Connecticut, and does not embrace the operations of sealers from other countries. Mr. Clark -describes the manner in which the seals at Mas-a-Fuera were attacked. At p. 407 of the article above cited he points out that between the years 1793 and 1807, 3,500,000 seals were obtained from-this island-by English and-American vessels, and in 1824 the island was "almost abandoned by these animals.". Mr. Clark also shows that in 1797 there were only 2,000,000 on the islands, and yet-in seven-years more than 3,000,000 were carried from the islands to Canton, China. Mention is made, too, of fourteen ships' crews on the island at one time killing seals. At p. 408 mention is made-of from-twelve to fifteen crews on shore at the same time (American and English), and that " there were constantly more or less of ships' crews stationed here for the purpose of taking fur-seals' skins,"- from 1793 to 1807-.- It is contended by the Canadian Government that a reference to the history of this island is entirely beside the contention on the part of the United States that it is necessary to keep sealing craft hundreds of miles away from rookeries in order to preserve the seal life on the breeding-grounds. The cause of injury • is the same in all the cases mentioned, and Mr. Chapel, in the Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter, now under consideration, at p. 5 well says :— " It is stated that at the Shetlands alone [which never equalled the present condition of the Pribylov group, mentioned by Hon. C A. Williams, already quoted], 100,000 per annum might have been obtained and the rookeries preserved if taken under proper restrictions; but, in the eagerness of men, old and young male and female seals were killed, and little pups a few days old, deprived of their mothers, died by thousands on the beaches'"—[it may here be observed that not a case of dead pups was ever found on the Pribylov group, so far as the Reports on the islands show]—** carcases and bones strewed on the shores." This statement, cited in the United States' Case, is direct authority for the Canadian contention. It illustrates three important points :—- 1. That indiscriminate slaughter on the breeding-grounds is injurious and in time destructive. 2. That when the mothers are killed, the young pups, dying in consequence, are found on the island. 3. That Regulations of the number to be killed on the island, with careful supervision, will maintain the rookeries independently of prohibiting sealing in the waters. The Report of the House of Representatives states:— " The only existing rookeries are those in Alaska, another in the Russian part of Behring's Sea, and a third on Lobos Island, at the mouth of the River Plate, in South America." The statement is incorrect. Important omissions occur, since the cases left out, when examined, show that, notwithstanding all of the extraordinary and indiscriminate slaughter of past years, it is possible, by careful supervision of the rookeries alone, and of the seals while on land, to revive, restore, and maintain lucrative rookeries. Quoting from an extract from a Russian Memorandum respecting the hunting of seals, communi- 437 may be divided in two distinct groups. The first group would comprise Commander Islands (Behring and Copper Islands, 45,000; Seal Islands, cated by M. de Staal to the Marquis of Salisbury, and dated the 25th July, 1888, it is found-that other rookeries are by no means deserted. The extract reads as follows:— " The places where fur-seal hunting is carried on Pribylov Islands, Behring's Sea, 100,000 killed in 1885 Okhotsk Sea, 4,000); total, 149,000. "The second group, the.sea near the coast of Victoria, 20,000; Lobos Islands, 15,000 ; islands near Cape Horn and the South Polar Sea, 10,000 ; islands belonging to Japan, 7,000; Cape of Good Hope, 5,000;. total, 57,000." An important omission is the case of Cape of Good Hope, in reference to which the Committee of the House of Representatives, previous to their Report, had been informed (see H. R. Report No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session, p. 114) that from the Cape of Good Hope Islands, under protection of the Cape Government, a yearly supply of 5,000 to 8,000 skins is derived, and that from Japan, it was stated, sometimes 15,000 and sometimes 5,000 a-year are received. These islands are now rigidly protected by the Governments of the countries to which they belong; but neither does the Government of the Cape, of Japan, nor of Uruguay, in the case of the Lobos Islands, consider it necessary to demand the restriction of the pursuit of seals in the open sea. United States' vessels have visited the islands off the Cape of Good Hope from 1800 to 1835, and have taken on some days 500 to 700 skins, securing several thousands of skins annually. In 1830 Captain Gurdon L. Allyn, of Gale's Eerry, Connecticut, mentions finding 1,000 carcases of seals at one of the islands, the skins of which had been taken. He landed and took seals in considerable numbers. He was again on a sealing voyage on this coast in 1834, and shot seals on the rookeries. In 1828 a plague visited these rookeries, and 500,000 seals perished during the plague (Clark in the Report of the United States' Commission of Fish and Fisheries, 1887, section 5, vol. ii, pp. 415, 416), and yet to-day we find a renewal of the industry by Regulations applied solely to the rookeries, and exclusive of the deep-sea operations. Upon p. 7 of the Appendix now under review, the Report of the "Congressional Committee on Alaska seal fisheries refers to testimony of United States' Government Agents regarding the number of seals shot and not secured, and a calculation is referred to, to the effect that one in every seven is alone secured by the hunter who follows seals on the sea. The experience of Canadian hunters is directly opposed to this theory, and shows that a loss of 6 per cent, is all that ever takes place, while Indian hunters seldom lose one. Solemn declarations to this effect have been made under the Canadian Statute relating to extra-judicial oaths. In confirmation of this, reference may be had to Mr. H. W. Elliott, in the United States' Fish Commissioner's Report, vol. ii, section 5, p. 489, where he says:— "The Aleuts fire at the otter at 1,000 yards range, and tbat, when hit in the head, nine times out of ten the shot is fatal.*' In the case of hunting the seals, the practice of the white hunters, all expert shots, is to paddle up to the seal while asleep in the water, shoot it in the head, and at once haul it into the boat; while the Indians approach it in a canoe and spear the seal, the head of the spear separating itself and being attached to a rope by which the seal is dragged into the canoe. Reference is made on p.'4 of the Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter to the limitations in the lease of 1870. These conditions, it is contended, are most inconsistent with the present view of the United States regarding the danger to the preservation of seal life. With respect to this the following facts should be carefully noted:— 1. Up to 1862 no Law in Russia existed prohibiting or forbidding the killing of seals, and in that year an inoperative Law was promulgated. (See Russian Memorandum, M. de Staal to Lord Salisbury, 25th July, 1888.) Mr. Mclntyre, a Special Agent of the Treasury Department (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 36, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 18), records the catch taken from the Pribylov Islands under the Russian-American Company, as follows:— Table showing the Number of Fur-seals taken by the Russians on St. Paul and St. Georj from 1817 to 1860. Islands 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 60,188 59,856 52,225 50,220 44,995 36,469 29,873 25,400 30,100 23,250 19,700 23,228 20,811 18,034 16,034 16,446 16,412 15,751 6,580 6,590 6,802 6,000* 6,000* 8,000* 8,000* 10,370 11,2-10 11,924 13,637 15,070 17,703 14,650 21,450 6,770 6,564 6,725 18,035 26,146 8,585 23,550 21,082 31,810 22,000 21,590 765,687 Approximative. 438 Referring to this Table, Mr. Mclntyre says:— 8 The number of seals on St. Paul Island is variously estimated at from 3,000,000 to 4,000,000, including all classes, and on St. George at about one-third as many. I think it may be safely stated that there are not less than 4,000,000 on the two islands. The Table from the records of the late Russian-American Company, appended to this Report, exhibits the number of seals taken from each island from 1817 to 1837, aud from 1842 to 1860. Previously to 1817, says the late Bishop Veniamnoff, no records were kept. From the same authority we learn that during the first few years following the discovery of the islands in 1781 over 100,000 skins were annually obtained; but this, it seems, was too large a number, for the decrease in the yearly return was constant until 1842, when they had become nearly extinct; and in the next decade the whole number secured was 129,178,.being in 1852 but 6,564 ; but from 1842, under judicious management, there appears to have been an increase, and in 1858,31,810 were taken, which was the largest catch in any one year, until 1867, when, as I am informed, some 80,000 or 100,000 were secured, under the supposition that the territory would soon be transferred to the United States. *The decrease from 1817 to 1838,' says Bishop Veniamnoff, 'averaged about one-eighth of the whole number annually, so that in 1834 there were produced on both islands, instead of 60,000 to 80,000, only 15,751, and in 1837, 6,802.' From the most careful computation I have been able to make, I am of the opinion that no more than 100,000—75.000 on St. Paul and 25,000 onSt. George—can be annually taken without incurring the risk of again diminishing the yearly production, as we observe the Russians to have done in former years." See also Wick, Chief of Land Service, Russian-American Telegraph Expedition, who reported in 1868 on undiminished condition of the seal fishery. (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 177, 40th Congress, 2nd Session.) Six million seals had been taken from this sea between 1841 and 1870. (Vide Dall on "Alaska and its Resources," 1870, p. 492.) 2. In 1868 Hutchinson and Morgan, the promoters and founders of the Alaska Commercial Company, and afterwards lessees of the islands, saw that, unless restrictions were imposed upon the islands, there would be ruin to the rookeries (H. W. Elliott, " Our Arctic Province," pp. 247, 248); consequently, by Act of Congress approved the 27th July, 1868, the killing of fur-seals on the islands was prohibited (W. H. Mclntyre, Special Agent, Treasury Department, H. R. Ex. Doe. No. 36, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, p. 12). Notwithstanding the Act to which reference has been made, 50,000 were killed on St. George and 150,000 on St. Paul by traders in 1868 (Dall, p. 496), 100,000 in 1869 (W. H. Mclntyre, H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 36, 41st Congress, p. 13). Mr. Wardman, an Agent of the United States' Treasury at the Seal Islands, in his " Trip: to Alaska," published 1884, on p. 92, says :— u General onslaught, threatening extermination, by American vessels during the interregnum of departure of Russian and installation of United States' Governments took place." And the same officer, in his sworn testimony given before the Congressional Committee, stated that 300,000 were killed in 1869. 3. Notwithstanding this condition of affairs, Secretary Boutwell reported in 1870 (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 129, p. 2, 41st Congress, 2nd Session) that " if the animals are protected, it is probable that about 100,000 skins may be taken each year without diminishing the supply," and that " great care was necessary for the preservation of the seal fisheries upon the Jslands of St. Paul and St. George'' So Dall, in his book on Alaska (1870, p. 496), in referring to slaughter by Russians, believed that 100,000 seals could safely be killed annually under Regulations, and Mr. Blaine, in his despatch to Sir Julian Pauncefote of the 27th January, says:— " In the course of a few years of intelligent and interesting experiment the number that could bo safely slaughtered was fixed at 100,000 per annum." Mr. Boutwell, as will be seen on reference to his Report, was opposed to a lease, and remarked that it was necessary in any event to maintain in and around the islands an enlarged naval force for the protection of the same. This Report was followed by the legislation uDder which a lease was executed in May 1870. 4. In drawing the terms of the lease and Regulations concerning the islands the United States permitted, in the then state of affairs, the lessees to take 100,000 seals a-year for twenty years, and they were permitted to make up this number from any male seals of 1 year of age or over. 5. The natives were allowed to destroy on the islands pup seals of either sex for food, numbering in some years 5,000. 6. The 100,000 could he killed by the lessees in the months of June, July, September, and October. Upon p. 8 of the Appendix to Mr. Blaine's note the opinion of the Committee of House of Representatives is given to the effect that the protection of the islands is not enough, but that the seals must be protected in their annual migrations to and from the rookeries, and for 50.miles south-east of the rookeries to their feeding-grounds. This is a far different proposal from that submitted by the Secretary of State, since it does not embrace the whole of the Behring's Sea, but locates the feeding- grounds, so called, within 50 miles of the islands. The other points, on p. 8 of the Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter to Sir Julian Pauncefote of the 3rd instant, need hardly be dealt with in discussing the necessity for a close season, reference being made therein to the sorting of the herd for killing on land so as not to kill the females. This is admittedly wise, since the killing is done 14th June when the pups are being dropped. The rest ' of p. 8 of Mr. Blaine's Memorandum raises the point that a seal is not a fish. So on p. 9 testimony is cited touching the necessity for not killing females on the rookeries, when wholesale slaughter of 100,000 a-year goes on, and this is not here controverted. The opinion of Mr. Gliclden, whose experience was confined to the land operations, regarding the proportion of- -seals recovered when shot in deep sea, cannot be of weight. It is, therefore, unnecessary to dwell upon the fact that he is a Government employe-, giving his views in favour of his Government's contention in 1888, after the seizures of 1885 had. taken place. This officer was on St. George Island from the 25th May to August in 1881 only. His opinion that an "open policy" would not preserve the value 439 of the seal fisheries, and that it is necessary to protect the seals in Behring's Sea, as well as on the islands, is not based upon much practical knowledge. He further stated that not much hunting was done in the Pacific. Honourable Mr. Williams, at p. 107 of Evidence before the Congressional Committee, says:— " Three miles beyond land (in Pacific) you do not see them; where they go no one knows." The British Columbian sealers and the record of their catches in the Pacific for twenty years weakens the standing of these witnesses as experts. Mr. Taylor, another witness, ascribes to the fish of Behring's Sea a very high order of intelligence. He deposes that in Behring's sea the seals eat a great many fish every twenty-four hours, and as " the fish have become well aware of the fact that there is a good many seals on the Seal Islands, they keep far out to sea." He stands alone in testifying so positively to what can, at best, be a matter for conjecture, and he fails to show he had the' slightest means of ascertaining this knowledge. He further stated that the bulls remain on the islands all summer. This is contradicted by writers and other United States' witnesses, as will be seen hereafter. It is, therefore, evident that this gentleman was testifying simply to his own peculiar theories regarding seal life upon very limited expeiience. He says, at one place, that while the cows are out (and they go, he tells us, 10 to 15 miles, and even further) the sealers catch them • while, at another place, he states:—j V The sea is black with them around Vie islands, where they pick up a good many seal, and there is where the killing of cows occurs—when they go ashore." So that, evidently, he may have seen cows killed when around the islands, the only place at which he apparently could observe them, and he has merely conjectured the distance that they go from land and the number actually shot in deep water. This witness " thinks there is some damage done in killing and shooting of the cows and leaving so many young without their mothers." There would be less doubt respecting the cows being shot or lost if it was satisfactorily shown that large numbers of young pups were found dead in the rookeries. The witness, if able, would have certainly pointed to this. The reverse, however, is the fact; and, with the exception of one witness before the Congressional Committee, whose evidence will be examined again, not an Agent of the Government nor a writer ever stated that pups were found dead in any numbers on the islands from loss of mothers; the fact being that mothers never go far from their young until the young are well able to care for themselves. This witness, notwithstanding his allusion to supposed damage by the killing of mothers, the killing of cows by vessels in shore—where the sea is black with them—had to admit, " the number of seal, in the aggregate, is not apparently diminished." His knowledge is confined to one year (1881), and we have better and undisputed testimony that long after this a great increase had taken place—an increase of millions. Mr. Taylor, it should be observed, however, gave other testimony than that quoted by Mr. Blaine. He sale' that— ■ "These predatory vessels »re generally there (in Behring's Sea) in the spring of the year, when the cows are going to the island to breed j most of the seals that are killed by these marauding vessels are cows with young." He estimates the number taken in 1881 at from 5,000 to 8,000. " These vessels will take occasion to hang around the islands, and when thero is a heavy fog to go on the rookeries very often." The chief damage, according to Mr. Taylor, is not the killing of mothers out at sea when their young are on shore depending upon the return of their mothers, as is contended, but it is due, he says, to the insufficient protection of the island This can, as will be pointed out, be remedied if the suggestions of Government Agents are acted upon in the line. of better police guarding of the rookeries. Mr. Williams' testimony is next referred to on p. 10 of the Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter. This gentleman was engaged in the whaling business for forty years (p. 73 of Evidence before Congressional Committee). As regards fur-seals, Iris knowledge is not based upon experience, but " from reading and from conversation with my captains" (p. 73). He was called by request of attorney for the Alaska Commercial Company, of which Mr. Williams was a stockholder. No importance, it is submitted, can be attached to his testimony regarding the habits and nature of the seal after such a frank confession. His evidence that females in pup mass together in the sea before landing may therefore be dismissed, since he does not produce any authority for a statement which is contradicted by expert testimony. Neither in his statement that hunters admit that out of eigut shots they would save one seal only correct. On pp. 1.1 and 12 of the Appendix Mr. Williams naturally gives his view for holding the control over seal life in Behring's Sea. It is not denied that every lessee of the Pribylov group would agree entirely with him in this. It may be remarked that he does not share the theory of the United States that the .chief danger lies in killing the mothers when out in the deep sea for food, having left their nurslings on shore. At pp. 10, 11, and 12 of the Appendix Mr. Williams is quoted to show that the danger to the females lies in the journey through the Aleutian Islands, with young, to the breeding-grounds. On p. 90 of his Evidence before the Committee, he illustrates the ineffective means of protecting the rookeries by stating :— " Last fall a schooner landed at one of the rookeries p.nd killed'seventeen cows and bulls right on the breeding rookeries." M 440 Again, at p. 106, he says:— • " That the present measures are somewhat insufficient is shown by the fact that for the last three or four years there have been increased depredations annually upon the rookeries. " A revenue-cutter goes upon the grounds and then is ordered north for inspection, or for relief of a whaling crew, or something of that kind, and they are gone pretty much the whole time of the sealing season, and there appears to be insufficiency of the- method of protection." On p. 108 he says:— " They shoot them as they find them A vessel can approach within less than half a mile or a quarter of a mile of the island and not be seen (on account of fog), and can send her boats on the beaches and get off fifty or a hundred skins before the inhabitants can find it out." Evidently Mr. Williams does not consider the shooting of females far from land is much indulged in, as he insists that the damage is done inshore, where no police protection is enforced. The history of the rookeries given on pp. 12, 13, and 14 of the Appendix has been dealt with already in this paper. On pp. 14 and 15 of the Appendix an article on fur-seals, from " Land and Water," written in 1877 by a Mr. Lee, is referred to. He merely alludes to the indiscriminate slaughter which was practised on the rookeries, which no one defends or justifies. Mr. Mclntyre, Superintendent of the seal fisheries of Alaska for the lessees, is then brought forward by Mr. Blaine. This gentleman went to the island as a Government Agent to inspect the operations of the Company. His Reports were favourable to and highly eulogistic of the Company, and they were immediately followed by his resignation as a Government official and his appointment to a lucrative position under the Company. His testimony is naturally more in favour of the Company and of the Government's contention, which is so directly in the interest of the Company, than the testimony of any other witness. He thinks only one-fifth of the seals shot are recovered, and his reason is that he has found seals with bullets in their blubbers on the islands. He attributes a deficiency in the number of seals in 1888 to the fact that cows were killed. He mentions that if cows are killed in August, and their young- deprived of their mothers' care, the young perish. The young perish also if the mother is killed before they are born. In this way he endeavours to represent such a practice obtains, but it is to be borne in mind that he does not go so far as to say that pups are found dead on the islands in any number. When this officer was reporting on the operations of the Company, and before the present contention was raised, he gave a glowing account of the increasing numbers of seals at the islands, as will be shown; but at p. 116 of the evidence before the Congregsional Inquiry he labours to reduce the estimates of both Elliott and Dall by one-third or one-half. He concludes that the number of seals has largely decreased in the last two years (1887 and 1888). The Company, however, killed their 100,000 in each of these years. The Government had the discretion to reduce the limit. The Government did not deem it necessary to do so. The number, this witness says, was increasing until 1882, and then other parties began the killing of seals, especially since 1884." All this told upon the rookeries, and, he added, " a considerable percentage" of the killing was made up of male seals (Evidence, p. 117). Mr. Mclntyre attempted to count the catch in 1886 and in 1887, and stated that 40,000 skins a-year were taken, nearly all in Behring's Sea water, and in a few instances by raids on the land. How he obtained this information is not shown. From his position on the Island of St. Paul during all that time his statement is obviously a mere surmise. He could only know personally of the catch from raids which were made on the island in 1886 and 1887, and which were due to ineffective protection of the islands. After telling us that a large percentage of the catch of the marauders was made up of adult males, he entirely forgets this, as we find him saying (at p. 118):— " A majority of the skins taken by marauders, in fact 80 or 90 per cent., are from females." It is submitted that this witness, whose interest on behalf of the Company (the lessees) is shown in his confession that it was at times necessary, in order to control the price in the markets, for the Company to take less than 100,000 seals (Evidence, p. 121), has not strengthened his testimony on the main point by speaking positively to the following, which could only have been known to him by hearsay:— (a.) Russia destroyed marauding vessels. (b.) A British vessel, in 1887, took 450 seals in Behring's Sea, secreted them on a small island, left them, and returned to the sea for more. (c.) Marauders kill 100,000 each season. (d.) It is not true that vessels are seized when pursuing legitimate business. He goes on to say that for the first fifteen years of the Company's lease, viz., from 1870 to 1885, the lessees were unmolested (p. 129), which statement has been shown to be 'incorrect. He observed that since 1882, and especially since 1884, other parties have been destroying seals, "reducing the equilibrium of the sexes." As will be submitted hereafter, he has been contradicted in regard to this by expert writers, historians, travellers, and Agents of the United States' Government. Mr. H. W. Elliott, whose experience is limited to 1872,1874, and 1876—when, as Mr. Mclntyre says, no injury was done by marauders—is next referred to by Mr. Blaine (p. 16 of Appendix). He is, referred to as a member of the Smithsonian Institute; he was also a Special Agent of the Treasury. The following are extracts taken from a " Report upon the Customs Districts, Public Service, and 441 Resources of Alaska Territory, by W. L. Morris, Special Agent of the Treasury Department, 1879 :— " In the November number of 'Harper's Magazine,' 1877, appears an article entitled 'Ten Years' Acquaintance with Alaska, 1867-77.' The authorship is correctly ascribed to Mr. Henry W. Elliott, now connected with' the Smithsonian Institution in sub-official capacity. This gentleman was formerly a special Agent of the Treasury Department, under a special Act of Congress, approved 22nd April, 1874, appointed for the purpose of ascertaining at that time the condition of the seal fisheries in Alaska, the haunts and habits of the seal, the preservation and extension of the fisheries as a source of revenue to the United States, with like information respecting the fur-bearing animals of Alaska generally, the statistics of the fur trade and the condition of the people or natives, especially those upon whom the successful prosecution of the fisheries and for trade is dependent. " This Report of Mr. Elliott will be further noticed hereafter, and, upon the threshold of criticizing anything he has written upon Alaska, occasion is here taken to give him full credit for his valuable contribution in regard to fur-seals. It is to be regarded as authority and well conceived. The views of Mr. Elliott, however, in reference to other matters of moment in the Territory, are so diametrioally opposed and antagonistic to my own that I feel constrained to review some of his statements, glittering generalities, and the wholesale method with which he brushes out of existence with bis facile pen and ready artist's brush anything of any essence of value, light, shade, or shadow in the broad expanse of Alaska that does not conform precisely to the rule of investigation and recital laid down by himself, and which contradicts his repeated assurances that outside of the Seal Islands and the immediate dependencies of the Alaska Commercial Company there is nothing in Alaska. " This magazine article bears a sort of semi-official indorsement, its authority is not denied, and with this explanation for nsing the name of Mr. Elliott in connection therewith, a few of its crudities and nudities will be noticed :— " ' The Sense-keeper of Alaska. " * So little is known about Alaska that whenever anything comes up in Congress relating to it information is sought wherever it can readily be found. The " informant" is ever on hand, with his work on fur-seals comfortably tucked underneath his left arm, to impart all the knowledge extant about the country, " for he knows more about Alaska than any man living." " ' A decade has passed since we acquired this Territory, and for a decade it has afforded employment and subsistence for its present sense-keeper; but the next decade is warming into national existence, and it is about time this bubble was pricked and the bladder not quite so much inflated. " ■ I am fully aware of all the consequences to be dreaded, the responsibility assumed, when rash enough to dispute the heretofore self-established authority from the Arctic Ocean to the Portland Canal.' " This man seems to be the natural foe of Alaska, prosecuting and persecuting her with the brush of the pencil and the pen of an expert whenever and wherever he can get an audience, and I attribute the present forlorn condition of the Territory to-day more to bis ignorance and misrepresentation than to all other causes combined. He is accused of being the paid creature and hired tool of the Alaska Commercial Company, and belonging to them body and soul. I have made diligent inquiry and ascertain he is not in their employ, and, furthermore, they repudiate the ownership. They should not be held responsible for the indiscreet utterings of the sense-keeper, notwithstanding the charge of ownership might cause him to be more readily listened to. " Doubtless when they have been attacked through the columns of the press they have employed this individual, who is unquestionably possessed with the cacoethes scribendi, to reply to unjustifiable onslaughts, and paid him for it as they would any other penny-liner who makes literature and writing for the press his profession." His evidence in 1888 is open advocacy of the United States' contention. His writings and Reports prior to the dispute will be referred to, and it will be submitted that his statements and experiences before 1888 hardly support his later theories. His statement on p. 17 of the Appendix, that wounded seals swim away to perish at a point never to be seen again, is contradicted by the last witness, Mr. Mclntyre, who picked handfuls of buckshot, &c, out of seals clubbed on the islands. His theory of the difficulty of shooting seals is contrary to the known practice of the hunters to creep upon the seal as it lies floating in the calm waters of the sea, and by his own testimony before quoted, of the unerring aim of the Indian hunters. Mr. Tingle, an Agent of the Treasury, in charge of the fur-seal islands from April 1885 to August 1886, is quoted by Mr. Blaine (Appendix, p. 17). Mr. Tingle is not able to go so far as Mr. Mclntyre, although he was at the islands in 1886 (Evidence, p. 153), but he stated "there has been a slight diminution of seals, probably." He estimated 30,000 were taken by marauders, and to do this he guesses that 500,000 were killed. This gentleman, as an Agent of the Treasury, was confined to the islands during his tenure of office (Evidence, p. 153). He bases his contention on the log of a marauding schooner which fell into his hands. This log was, it may be remarked, not produced, and no excuse is given for withholding it. He produced what he said was a copy. As his opinions are based upon this curious statement, his testimony can hardly be seriously pressed He testified to insolence of sealers when seized, though he does not appear to have been present at any of the seizures. The log-book, it should be observed, is said to have belonged to the " Angel Dolly." This is not the name of a Canadian sealer, and it may here be stated that no Canadian sealer has ever been found within the 3-mile limit. The operations on the schooner " Angel Dolly " must have been rather expensive, and they do not corroborate the allegation that large catches were made, since 300 rounds of ammunition (Mr. Tingle said) were wasted for the capture of one seal. Another supposed entry in the log is most extraordinary for the captain of a sealer, under any circumstances, to make. The statement referred to is as follows:— " It is very discouraging to issue a large quantity of ammunition to your boats and have so few seals returned." There is not a Magistrate's Court in the country that would listen to this oral testimony as to the contents of a log. A reference to this pretended log—a copy of a portion thereof only being produced by Mr. Mclntyre (p. 332 of Evidence)—shows that the captain had an exceptionally bad crew. The captain described them in the following terms : " The hardest set of hunters in Behring's Sea;" he " never will be caught with such a crowd again; they are all a set of curs." The captain added, however, that if " we only had hunters, we would be going home now with 1,500 skins at the very least;" and from the log it would appear that he had no regular hunters on board. It is worthy of remark that the statements made by Mr. Tingle respecting the entries in this alleged log are not confirmed by an inspection of the transcript Mr. Mclntyre produces (on p. 332 of Evidence). Mr. Tingle contradicts Mr. Mclntyre regarding the number of seals on the island. He states (p. 162, Evidence) that there had been an increase of seals since Mr, Elliott's count in 1876 of [128J 3 L 442 111 . 2,137,500. He expressed natural astonishment (p. 163) at -the statement of Mr. Elliott regarding a decrease. He says:— " I am at a loss to know how Mr. Elliott gets bis information, as he had not been on the islands for fourteen years." Pushed by the Chairman of the Committee by the following question, viz., " It is Mr. Mclntyre's opinion that they have not only not increased, but have decreased," the witness, in reply, stated that " there has been a slight diminution of seals, probably" The next authority quoted by the United States is William Gavitt, a Special Agent of the Treasury at St. George Island from May 1887 to August 1888. The evidence of this witness is not referred to at any length by Mr. Blaine. The witness testified before the Congressional Committee, however, that the employes of the Company (the lessees) did not respect the laws of God or man. He named particularly Mr. Webster, Dr. Luty, John Kirk, and John Hall (p. 180). And he added that the rules of the Company were violated. The Committee handled this witness rather roughly, Mr. Jeffries saying to him (p. 188):— " You had better understand what you are talking about." On p. 191 he rebukes other officers of the Treasury who had testified positively to matters without the means of knowledge. The witness was asked:— " What was the result of your observations and opinions that yon deem reliable in respect to the unlawful killing of seal annually ?" The witness answered that— "We have no means of knowing that." He was then pressed in this way:— " It is a mere matter of estimate, of course, but I wish it based upon as reliable information as you have." When the witness said— " I think the first season the revenue-cutter captured 15,000 stolen skins (p. 191); where they were stolen, whether in the sea or out of it, no agent could truthfully say." He also showed that the lessees of the islands were not so particular as other Agents pretend, when he tells us (p. 191) that they bought from the natives at Ounalaska 5,000 seals killed by them, there (p. 196). The United States puts forward this officer as a reliable witness, and it is, therefore but fair to attach importance to a statement which weakens the force of the ex parte statement and opinion of the Special Agents sent from time to time to the islands, and who have now been brought forward on behalf of the United States as witnesses in support of a case which concerns not merely the Government, but most directly the lessees. The witness stated that one of the employes of the Company toid him that when a Government officer came there and got along with the Company it was profitable. Upon being asked by the Committee, before whom he was giving evidence, to explain, he replied that— "A man could draw two salaries, like Mr. Falkner and Judge Glidden, one from the Government and one from the Company " (p. 191). Mr. Moulton's evidence is next presented (p. 19 of Appendix). He was a Government A^ent from 1877 to 1885. He said that there was an apparent increase during the first five years, i.e., to 1882, then a decrease to 1885 (Evidence, p. 255). In this statement he has been contradicted by official Reports, as will be shown. The witness admits, however, that female seals, after giving birth to their young, scatter out in Behring's Sea; and he is of opinion that lawless hunters kill all they find, and that they find mothers away from their nurslings. No special reason for this opinion is given, however. A sailor, Edward Shields, of Vancouver, formerly on the sealing-schooner " Caroline," is said to have testified, where and when it is not stated (p. 20 of Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter), that in 1886 out of 686 seals taken by the " Caroline" the seals were chiefly females. Upon this, it may be said that it is the custom among hunters to class all seals the skins of which are the size or near the size of the female as " females," for their guidance as to the quality of skins in the catch. It may also be remarked that it does not appear that these females were in milk, and this is always known when skinning the seal. " Dry cows " are caught, as has been admitted, and taking this evidence, °iven ex parte as it was, it is at best, if true, an exceptional case in a very small catch. Mr. Glidden was recalled by the Committee, and explained that his estimate of 40,000 skins was based on newspaper reports of the catch of the sealers. He was, of course, unable to show how many of these were taken near the Aleutian Islands, in the North Pacific, or on the west coast of British Columbia, or in the Puget Sound, but he evidently credits the whole estimated catch to Behring's Sea. Consequently he was of opinion that sealing in Behring's Sea should be ended, to lead to the better preservation of seal life. It is to be observed that not one of these witnesses, whose opinions are relied upon both as to the catch, the habits, and sex of the seal in deep water and the method of shooting, &c, has had any experience as a hunter or with hunters. They were not experts. They were sent to the islands to see that the lessees performed their obligations as covenanted in the lease. The experience of most of them was limited to a few years' residence on the Seal Islands, associated with and under the natural influence of a Company admittedly a monopoly and desirous of restricting the catch so as to control the market of the world as far as seals are concerned. None of the witnesses were, moreover, submitted to a cross-examination, and they were to a large 443 extent led by the examiners in the questions put to them. The only facts that were possibly within their knowledge relate to seal life on the islands, to the mode of killing, and to the times when killed there, and to their habits when in and upon the rookeries. The opinions of the gentlemen given before the Congressional Committee in 1888, for the most part, though sometimes contradictory, are in favour of the under-mentioned theories!— 1. That the female seals while nursing their young go great distances in search of food. 2. I hat when out a great distance female seals are shot, and the pups on shore aie lost for want of their mothers' care. 3. That the greater part of the catch in Behring's Sea is made up of female seals. 4. That the destruction of the seals when hunted on the sea is great in consequence of many wounded seals being lost. . All of these opinions are put forward in support of the main proposition of the United States, viz., that since 1882, and especially since 1884, the number of seals usually collecting on the breeding- ground has constantly diminished. The Canadian Government joins issue upon this, and the counter-assertion is made that there has been no appreciable diminution of seals frequenting the rookeries, and it is claimed that the seals are more numerous and more valuable upon the rookeries to-day than ever in their previous history; that this is the fact notwithstanding the rookeries have been for twenty years practically unprotected from frequent and most dangerous raids upon the actual breeding-grounds, and many other injuries, all within the control of the Government of the United States, as hereinafter specified. The Canadian Government asserts that the seal life upon the islands cannot only be maintained, but greatly increased by the adoption on the part of the United States of— 1. An efficient means for the patrol and protection of the islands. 2. By the prohibition of the killing of pups by the natives for food. 3. By reducing the number of yearling seals to be killed by the lessees. 4. By not permitting any killing of seals upon the islands, excepting in July, August, and September. 5. By preventing the Aleuts from killing seals on their migration through the Aleutian Islands on their way to and from the breeding-grounds. In Mr. Blaine's despatch to Sir Julian Pauncefote of the 27th January, 1890, he proceeds upon a somewhat different ground than the evidence already reviewed, in order to show the necessity for prohibition of sealing in the waters of Behring's Sea. The ex parte evidence before the Congressional Committee satisfied that Committee that " the present number of seals on St. Paul and St. George Islands has materially diminished during the last two or three years," viz., from 1886 to 1889, while Mr. Mclntyre, whose evidence is so much relied upon by the United States, dates the decrease from 1882. Mr. Blaine, however, adopts the view that the rookeries were in prime condition and undiminished until 1885, when, as he says, Canadian sealers made their advent into Behring's Sea and the injury' began. It is therefore important to point out that the operations of the Canadian sealers were absolutely harmless compared with the numerous depredations upon the islands for the last century, which, however, have not yet begun to affect the value and number of seals on these wonderful rookeries. Already evidence has been cited in this paper establishing the fact that extraordinary slaughter occurred prior to 1870, and that after all this, when the total number of seals on St. Paul and St. George Islands was admittedly less than now, it was deemed safe to permit 100,000 male seals of 1 year or over to be killed annually for twenty years, &c. In 1870 Collector Phelps, of San Francisco, reported:— " I am assured the entire number taken south of tbe Islands of St. George and St. Paul will aggregate, say, 10,000 to 20,000 per annum." (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 35, 44th Congress, 1st Session.) The Acting Secretary of the Treasury Department, in September-1870, gave permission to the Company to use fire-arms for protection of the islands against marauders. (H. R., 44th Congress, 1st Session, Ex. Doc. No. 83, p. 30.) In 1872 Collector Phelps, to Mr. Secretary Boutwell, reports expedition fitting out in Australia and Victoria for sealing in Behring's Sea with the object of capturing seals on their migrations to and from St. Paul and St. George Islands. Secretary Boutwell did not consider it expedient to interfere with these operations if they were carried on 3 miles from land. In 1874 Mr. Secretary Sawyer, writing to Mr. H W. Elliott, referred to British vessels taking fur-seals in United States' waters and to the seals becoming more numerous. In 1875 Mr. William Mclntyre, an Assistant Agent of the Treasury, describes having been told that the crew of the schooner " Cygnet," as she lay at anchor in Zapadnee Bay in 1874, were shooting seals from the deck, skinning them, and throwing the carcases overboard, which was alarming the seals and driving them from their breeding-grounds. And he said:— " I wished to give the captain of the vessel timely warning before proceeding to harsh measures. I had armed the natives with the intention of repelling by force any attempts to kill seal on the rookeries or within rifle-shot of the shore, if the crews still persisted in doing so after the receipt of my letter to the captain." He described the operations of the " Cygnet" under the cliff near the rookery, which alarmed the seals so that they left the rookery in large numbers. (Ex. Doc. No. 83, p. 124, 44th Congress, 1st Session.) This vessel is again reported by Special Agent Bryant in 12th May, 1875. (Ex. Doc. No. 83, p. 125, 44th Congress, 1st Session.) Prom 1874 to 1878 Mr. F. J. Morgan, Attorney for the Alaska Company, was on the islands during the years 1868, 1869, and from 1874 to 1878. He speaks of several raids upon the islands in [128] 3L2 mm III mm 444 Ins time, and he says the whole question is one or more cruizers to protect the rookeries on the islands. (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 3883, 50th Congress, pp. 58, 71, 109.) In 1875 the evidence of Darius Lyman contains the following information. (Report, Committee Ways and Means, House Report No. 623, 44th Congress, 1st Session.) Answering Mr. Burchand as to what he knew about the seizure of the " San Diego," Mr. Lyman replied •— "There was a seizure made of the ' San Diego,' a schooner, near St. Paul Island, on the 27th July last (1875), on board of which were 1,660 fur-seal skins. The \ San Diego' was sent down to California, and arrived there in August." fM On p. 73 of the same Report, Mr. Elliott, in answer to Mr. Chapin, says that the skins taken from the I San Diego " were from Otter Island, one of the leased group. In 1880 Mr. Mclntyre reported the estimated annual slaughter of 5,000 pregnant females on the British Columbia coast. « From Reports of Special Agent Ottis and Captain Bailey respecting the people of Alaska and then- condition (Senate Ex. Doc. No. 132, 46th Congress, 2nd Session, vol. iv, p. 4), Captain Bailey says:— "During April and May all the coast Indians, from the mouth of the Straits of Fuca to the north end of Prince of Wales Island, find profitable employment in taking fur-seals which seem to be making the passage along the coast to the north, being probably a portion of the vast number that finally congregate at the Seal Island later in the season. I am informed by the Indians that most of the seals taken along this coast are females, and their skins find a market at the various Hudson Bay posts.'.' On p. 34 of the same Report, in a list of the vessels boarded, he gives the United States' schooner " Loleta," Dexter master, seized at the Seal Islands by Special Agent Ottis. In a Report by Special Commissioner Ivan Petroff in the year 1880, he says :— " As these seals pass up and down the coast as far as the Straits of Fuca and the mouth of Columbia River, quite a number of them are secured by hunters, who shoot or spear them as they find them asleep at sea. Also small vessels are fitted out in San Francisco, which regularly cruize in these waters for the purpose alone of shooting sleeping seal." (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 40, 46th Congress, 3rd Session, vol. xviii, p. 65.) At p. 61 of the same Report this officer speaks of the natives securing 1,200 to 1,400 young fur- seals in transitu through Oonalga Pass. Special Agent D. B. Taylor, in 1881, states that the Company was powerless to protect the islands, but that if a harbour was built and a steam-launch stationed at each island, they could be protected. He states that vessels go to the islands and hill 10,000 to 15,000 a-year, and that 100 vessels have been prowling about these islands for twenty years. (H. R Ex. Doc. No. 3883, 50th Congress, p. 58.) Mr. Treasury Agent H. A. Glidden, who was on the islands from 1882 to 1885, shows that the trouble is at the islands. The hunters go there on moonlight nights. He stated that he took possession of a vessel while the crew were on shore killing seals. The Government, he goes on to say, did not keep vessels there in his time, and he recommended that a revenue-cutter should be kept there to guard the islands. (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 3883, 50th Congress, p. 28.) Prior to the decision of the United States to arrest vessels outside the 3-mile limit in Behring's Sea experience had shown that the police force at the islands could not protect them from raids. This is illustrated, in a letter from the Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. W. McCulloch, dated the 24th February, 1885, wherein he recommends that 25,000 dollars be obtained for the protection of seals and the enforcement of the laws:— " The seal fisheries," he states, " yield annually to the Government a revenue of about 300,000 dollars. The islands on which the seals are taken are protected from incursions of marauding vessels alone through the cruizing of the revenue-cutters. Last year the officers of the ' Corwin' seized a schooner engaged in taking seals unlawfully. Without the use of cutters the fur-seal industry has no protection." The letter closes by asking for 25,000 dollars "in the Estimates for next year." (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 252, 48th Congress, 2nd Session, vol. xxix.) September 1,1884, the Hamburgh schooner "Adele" was seized for violation of section 1956, Revised Statutes, United States. In 1884 Captain McLean, master of the schooner " Mary Ellen," was in Behring's Sea from the 8th July to the 22nd August. He took 2,007 seals, and was not interfered with. (See his declaration under Act for the Suppression of Extra-judicial and Voluntary Oaths.) Mr. George Wardman, an officer of the United States' Government, was at the Seal Islands May 1885. He was also there in 1879, and, in addition to his evidence before the Congressional Committee, he has reported to his Government, and has written a book upon Alaska and Behring's Sea," Wardman's Trip to Alaska," published in 1884. At p. 116 of this is given an account of the raiding of Otter Islands, and the consequent request for a revenue marine guard at that place during the sealing season, which was granted. In 1885 Captain McLean again visited Behring's Sea in the " Mary Ellen." He was there from the 4th July to the 3rd September. He took 2,300 seals, and was not interfered with. Captain Healy, in reporting on the cruize of the "Corwin" in the Behring's Sea, in 1885, when speaking of the seal fisheries, said:— " During the year quite a number of vessels have raided Alaskan waters for seals and other fur-bearing animals." (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 153, 49th Congress, 1st Session, vol. xxxii.) In 1886 the Governor of Alaska, in his Report for that year (p. 43), states that an indiscriminate slaughter was carried on previous to the seizures of 1885. In 1886 Special Agent Tingle, to Secretary Fairchild, congratulated the Government on the arrest of the " San Diego," which he called " an old offender." " This," Mr. Tingle remarked, " will do much 445 to break up marauding business around the islands." He further urged the Government to keep a cutter about the islands from the 1st July to the 1st November. The above references, it is submitted, establish conclusively the defenceless condition of the islands from the depredations of the marauders or poachers upon the rookeries (not one being a Canadian) ever since the islands came into the possession of the United States. Mr. Blaine, in his despatch of the 27th January, 1890, remarks that— " Proceeding by a close obedience to the laws of Nature, and rigidly limiting the number to be annually slaughtered, the Government succeeded in increasing the total number of seals and adding correspondingly and largely to the value of the fisheries." And in the same despatch he speaks of the profitable pursuit of this business down to the year 1886. To show that at the present time the value of the islands is greater and their condition is better than ever, it is only necessary to observe that while the late lessees paid to the Government of the United States an annual rental of 50,000 dollars in addition to 2 dol. 62 J c. per skin for the total number taken, the offers, when the islands were put up for competition in 1890, were enormously exceeded, as will be seen on reference to a schedule of the proposals submitted to the United States' Treasury Department in response to the advertisements of the Treasury inviting offers for the privileges, dated the 24th December, 1889, and the 20th February, 1890. Upon reference to the evidence before the Congressional Committee (H. R. No. 3883, 50th Congress, 2nd Session), it will be seen that " the Government now, without any care or risk, gets 317,000 dollars a-year for the lease." And at p. 99 of the same Report it is stated that the annual income from skins to the Government was 512,736 dollars, and that in sixteen years the United States' Government received from the Alaskan fur-seal industry 8,203,776 dollars. It is further stated that.the Government had then already been repaid the capital sum paid for the whole Territory of Alaska, and more, with " her many varied, and, as I believe, incomparably great national resources, to represent the investment of capital first made." "Fifth.—The Receipts and Expenses of the Government on account of said Contract. "The total amount paid by the lessees on account of said contract up to the 30th June, 1888, inclusive, was 5,597,100 dollars. The total amount expended by the Government during the same period was about 250,000 dollars for salaries and travelling expenses of Agents of the Treasury Department at the Seal Islands, and about 150,000 dollars for the revenue-cutters cruizing Alaskan waters. " To the amount already received direct from the Company should be added the sum received by the United States from customs duties on Alaskan-dressed sealskins imported from Europe, amounting to 3,426,000 dollars, to which should be added the sum of 502,000 dollars customs duties on imported sealskins taken by said Company under its contract with Russia, making an aggregate amount received by the Government on account of this industry of 9,525,233 dollars, being 2,325,283 in excess of the amount paid to Russia for the Territory." (Report of Congress, 1888.) It can now be shown how marvellous has been the increase of seals on these islands, notwithstanding the absence of the protection to the rookeries and 3-nule limit, whether around the islands or at the different passes in the Aleutian range, where the breeding seals in pup go twice a-year. In 1869 Special Agent Bryant estimated the number of seals to be as follows (41st Congress, 2nd Session, No. 32, Senate, p. 7):— ' On St. Paul Island . On St. George Island. Total 1,152,000 576,000 1,728,000 In 1874 Mr. Elliott, after examination, estimated the number of seals to be :- ■ On St. Paul Island .. On St. George Island.. Total 3,030,000 163,420 3,193,420 exclusive of non-breeding seals, and adding those to the estimate of Mr. Elliott just quoted, he himself said that the total would reach 4,700,000. In 1884, long after the period when Mr. Mclntyre stated that the seals were decreasing—as he said since 1882—Mr. Wardman, when writing from the islands, tells us— " The number of seals is steadily increasing." (" A Trip to Alaska," p. 93.) Mr. H. A. Glidden, an Agent of the Treasury from 1882 to the 8th June, 1885, an authority quoted by Mr. Blaine in support of the United States' contention, told the Congressional Committee in 1888, in replying to the question, " What do you say about the increase or diminution of the on the rookeries of St. Paul and St. George ?" number of seals " I did not notice any change I could not see any particular difference. They come and have their young and go away. The period of gestation is eleven months, and then they come back in the spring following. They are there during the season in countless numbers." (Evidence before Congressional Committee, p. 27.) Mr. George R. Tingle, a Special Agent of the Treasury, g Committee, and he is put forward by Mr. Blaine in support of his the 17.) evidence before the same United States' contention. (Appendix to Mr. Blaine's letter to Sir Julian Pauncefote, March 1, p. 17 Confirming Mr. Glidden's opinion, as above quoted, Mr. Tingle said: "From Mr. Elliott's statement I understand that there are no more seals now than there were in 1872. how Mr. Elliott got his information, as he had not been on the islands for fourteen years." I am at a loss to know II 1 am 446 The same Mr. Tingle, in 1887, reported to Secretary Fairchild that:— " He found the line's of occupancy extending beyond those of last year, and the cows quite as densely packed on the ground on most of the rookeries, whilst on two rookeries there is some falling-off. It is certain, however, this vast number of animals, so valuable to the Government, are still on the increase. The condition of all the rookeries could not be better." (Appendix to Report, Congressional Committee, 1888, p. 359.) In a Report of the Alaska Commercial Company (13th December, 1887) it is stated that Mr. George R. Tingle, the Agent appointed by the Secretary of the Treasury, substantially confirms Mr. Elliott in his view referred to above, excepting that, upon a careful survey by himself in 1886, he estimated that the fur-seals upon the two islands had increased in number about 2,000,000 up to that time. Mr. Tingle's estimate for 1886 is 6,537,750 (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 31, 50th Congress, 1st Session), and in December the Alaska Commercial Company, in their Report, said that the seals were on the increase. The latest definite information appearing in the United States' documents regarding the condition of the rookeries is contained in the Report of Mr. Tingle, who, as Special Agent of the Treasury Department, wrote from St. Paul Island, Alaska, the 31st July, 1888, as follows:— "I am happy to be able to report that, although late landing, the breeding rookeries are filled out to the lines of measurement heretofore made, and some of them much beyond these lines, showing conclusively that seal life is not being depleted, but is fully up to the estimates given in my Report of 1887." From the above United States' officials it is clear that, with only partial protection on the islands, the seals have increased in an amazing degree. These islands, containing in 1874 the largest number of seals ever found in the history of sealing at any place, contain to day a more astounding number. When the number was less than half of what it is at present, Lieutenant Washburn Maynard, of the United States' navy, was instructed to make an investigation into the condition of the fur trade of the Territory ot Alaska, and in 1874 he reported that 112,000 young male seals had been annually killed in each year, from 1870 to 1874, on the islands comprising the Pribylov group, and he did not think that this diminished the numbers. Lieutenant Maynard's Report (44th Congress, 1st Session, H. R No. 43), as well as that of Mr. Bryant in 1869 (Ex. Doc. No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session), largely supports the contention of the Canadian Government respecting the productiveness of the seal and their habits during the breeding season. It is not denied that seals enter Behring's Sea for the purpose of resorting to the islands to propagate their species, and because the immense herd is chiefly confined to the islands for this purpose during the breeding season it is that the seals have so constantly increased. Notwithstanding the lax efforts on the part of the United States to guard or patrol the breeding islands, the difficulty of approaching the rough coasts thereof, the prevalence of fogs, and other causes, have, in a large degree, prevented too destructive or too numerous raids being made upon the rookeries. The Canadian Government contends that while seals in calf are taken on and off the coasts of British Columbia and California, and also during their migrations near the Aleutian Islands by Indians and Aleuts, the bulk of the seals taken in the open sea of that part of the Pacific Ocean called Behring's Sea are bulls, both old and young—but chiefly young—and that most of the cows, when taken, are known as " dry cows," i.e., cows that have nursed and weaned their young, or cows that are barren, or those that have lost pups from natural causes. It must also be noted that there are more females than males in a herd of seals. (" Trip to Alaska," Wardman, p. 94.) The position taken by the Canadian Government is supported— 1. By the history of the rookeries as above given and the great increase shown, despite the constant killing and raids upon the islands during the past century. 2. By the fact that the old bulls that have been able to hold their position on the rookeries go into the water at the end of the rutting season, between the 1st and 10th August. (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session, Appendix, p. 132.) Mr. Clark, on the Antarctic seal fisheries, in " The Fisheries and Fishery Industries in the United States," 1887, pp. 423, 424, says:— " In very stormy weather, when they (the seals) are driven into the sea, they are forced to betake themselves to the sheltered side of the island, hence the men find that stormy weather pays them best. Two or three old males, termed 'beach-masters,' hold a beach to themselves and cover it with cows, but allow no other males to haul up. The males fight furiously, and one man told me that he had seen an old male take up a younger one in his teeth and throw him into the air. The males show fight when whipped, and are with great difficulty driven into the sea. " They are sometimes treated with horrible brutality. The females give birth to the young soon after their arrival. " After leaving the rookeries the bulls do not return to them again that season." 3. By the fact that two-thirds of all the males that are born are never permitted to land upon the same ground with the females. This large band of bachelors, when it visits land, herds miles away from the breeding-grounds. (H. W. Elliott, H. R. No. 3883, 50th Congress, p. 112.) They are driven off into the water. (Clark's article on Antarctic seal fishery industries of the United States, section 5, vol. ii, 1887, p. 431.) Young seals are prevented from landing on rookeries. (Ex. Doc. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 93; see also Elliott, H. R., 44th Congress, 1st Session, Ex. Doc. No. 83.) Yearling seals arrive about the middle of July, accompanied by a few of the mature males, remaining a greater part of the time in the water. (H. H. Mclntyre, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, H. R. No. 36, p. 14; also H. R. Ex. Doc. 43, 1st Session, 44th Congress, p. 4.) Mr. Samuel Falkner, Assistant Treasury Agent, writing from St. George Island, 1st August, 1873, to Mr. Bryant, Treasury Agent for the Seal Islands, says:— '447 " I notice on some of tbe rookeries the passage-ways, formerly occupied by young bachelors in- hauling upon the background, are completely blocked up by females, thus preventing the young seals from landing; and as the greater portion of this island shore is composed of high cliffs, it renders it difficult for any great number to effect a landing. There are also numerous old males constantly . guarding the shore line, which makes it still more difficult for the young ones to work their way on the background." Then, again, it must be remembered that the non-breeding seals, consisting of all the yearlings and all the males under 6 or 7 years of age, nearly equal in number the breeding seals, and Mr. Elliott estimated, when there were 4,700,000 seals on the island, 1,500,000 of this number were non-breeding . seals. (Elliott, Appendix to H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 79.) On thick foggy days bachelor seals, numbering over a million, will often haul out on different hauling-grounds, and on the recurrence of fine weather disappear into the water. (Elliott, p. 144, H. R., 44th Congress, 1st Session, Ex. Doc. No. 83.) The young bachelors do not remain on shore long at a time. (Page 4, 44th Congress, 1st Session, Ex. Doc. No. 43.) They are so numerous, however, that thousands can be seen upon the hauling-grounds, as all of them are never either on shore or in the water at the same time. (Ibid., p. 44.) By the fact that the cows remain with their pups and suckle them until all have left. They do not go on the rookeries until 3 years of age. (H. R. Ex. Doc, 44th Congress, 1st Session, No. 43, p. 4.) They do not go far from shore until the young are reared. Peron says that both parent elephant seals stay with the young, without feeding at all, until the young are 6 or 7 weeks old, and that then the old ones conduct the young to the water. (Clark's article on Antarctic seals, p. 424.) The young are suckled hy the females for some time and then left to themselves, lying on the beach, where they seem to grow fat without further feeding. (" The Fisheries and Fishing Industries of the United States," section 5, voL ii, 1887, p. 424.) For this reason those that are pupped in June • are off in the water in August. So, also, on the African coast, the seal remains until the young can take care of themselves. (Ibid., p. 416.) The bulk of the seals are confined to the islands until ice surrounds them. (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 45, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 2.) The seals never leave their places, seldom sleep, and never eat anything from May to August, when they take to the water, but, it is believed, take no food until their final departure in November. (H. H. Mclntyre, H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 36, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, voL v.) Mr. Elliott says, "perhaps she feeds" (p. 130, his Report on Alaska, 1874, H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 83 44th Congress). The bulls, while on the island, prevent the mothers taking to the water. (" Marine Mammals," by Captain Shannon, United States' Revenue Marine, 1874, p. 152.) From the 10th to the 25th July the rookeries are fuller than at any other time during the season, as the pups have all been born, and all the bulls, cows, and pups remain within their limits. (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 43, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 3.) It has been shown that when in the rookeries mothers were destroyed, the young were found dead, &c, but Professor Elliott, in reference to the Pribylov Islands, says:— "With the exception of those animals which have received wounds in combat, no sick or dying seals are seen upon the islands. " Out of the great numbers, thousands upon thousands, of seals that must die every year from old age alone, not one have I ever seen here. They evidently give up their lives at sea." (His Report on Alaska, 1874, H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, p. 150.) To further prove that the contention of the Canadian Government is not at all unreasonable, it may be said* that at the International Fisheries Exhibition, London, 1883, Mr. Brown Goode, of the United States' Fish Commission, having stated the Regulations of the United States' concerning the Pribylov group, the official Report upon the Exhibition says :— " Every animal, both in sea and on land, reproduces its kind in greater numbers than can possibly exist. In other words, all animals tend to multiply more rapidly than their food j many of them must in consequence either die or be destroyed, and man may rest satisfied that, so far as the open ocean is concerned, the fish which he destroys, if he abstain from destroying, would perish in other ways. With respect to the former (seals), I have already pointed out that the restriction which the United States' Government has placed on the destruction of seals in the Alaskan islands seems unnecessarily large." He added that Nature has imposed a limit to their destruction. Professor Elliott himself was of the opinion in 1874 (see his Report on Alaska already referred to, pp. 88, 89) that:— " With regard to the increase of the seal life, I do not think it within the power of human management to promote this end to the slightest appreciable degree beyond its present extent and condition in a state of nature; for it cannot fail to be evident, from my detailed description of tbe habits and life of the fur-seal on these islands during a great part of the year, that, could man have'the same supervision and control over this animal during the whole season which he has at his command while they visit the land, he might cause them to multiply and increase, as he would so many cattle, to an indefinite number, only limited by time and means; but the case in question, unfortunately, takes the fur-seal six months out of every year far beyond the reach, or even cognizance, of any one, whei e it is exposed to known powerful and destructive natural enemies, and many others probably unknown, which prey upon it and, in accordance with a well-recognized law of Nature, keep it at about a certain number, which has been for ages, and will be for the future, as affairs now are, its maximum limit of increase. This law holds good everywhere throughout the animal kingdom, regulating and preserving the equilibrium of life in a state of nature. Did it not hold good these seal islands and all Behring's Sea would have been literally covered, and have swarmed with them long before the Russians discovered them ; but there were no more seals when first seen here by human (yes in 1786-87 than there are now, in 1874, as far as all evidence goes. # * * * * # # " What can be done to promote their increase ? We cannot cause a greater number of females to be born every year; we do not touch or disturb these females as they grow up and live, and we save more than enough males to serve them. Nothing more can be done, for it is impossible to protect them from deadly enemies in their wanderings for food. " This great body of four and five millions of hearty active animals must consume an enormous amount of food every year. They cannot average less than 5 lbs. of fish each per diem (this is not half enough for an adult male), which gives the consumption of over three million tons of fish every year! " To get this immense food supply the seals are compelled to disperse over a very large area »f the North Pacific and fish. This 448 brings them into contact more and more with their enemies as they advance south, until they leach a point where their annual destruction from natural foes is equal to their increase, and at this point their number will remain fixed. About the Seal Islands I have failed to notice the least disturbance among these animals by anything in the water or out, and from my observation I am led to believe that it is not until they descend well to the south in the North Pacific that they meet with sharks and voracious killer- whales."* The following extract from the Report of Mr. H. H. Mclntyre, Special Agent of the Treasury at the islands in 1869, largely supports the foregoing views:— " The habits of the fur-seal are peculiar and, in considering the action necessary to their protection, deserve careful attention. From the statements of the employes of the late Russian-American Company, the information derived from the intelligent native Chief of St. Paul Island, and my own observation during the summer of 1869, I have reached the following conclusions: The seals reach the Islands of St. Paul and St. George in May, June, and July of each year in the following order—first, a small number of old male seals, known as wigs, visit the islands very early in the spring, or as soon as the ice has melted sufficiently to allow them to reach the rocks upon the shore. Their object at this time seems to be solely to reconnoitre their old rookeries with a view to reoccupy them, if they have not been disturbed, and the natives, so understanding it, avoid any noise likely to alarm them, and in case the wind is in such direction as to carry the smoke from the Settlement towards the rookeries all fires are extinguished. After a few days these pioneers take their departure, and as the season advances, if they have been undisturbed on the occasion of their first visit, they return, bringing with them all the males of mature age, above 5 or 6 years old, who are able to maintain their places in the breeding rookeries. Climbing up on the rocks, each seal selects his position and takes possession of and occupies through the season, if sufficiently strong, from one to three square rods of ground. Still later in the season, when the ice has nearly disappeared, the females arrive, conveyed by the young males above one year of age, who are unable to occupy the rookeries with their seniors. The females, immediately on reaching the shore, are appropriated by the old males and taken to the places respectively selected by them for the season, which is generally the same for many successive years. It is asserted that the same male seal has been known to occupy one rock for more than twenty seasons. The young seals above one year of age, called bachelors, take their positions around the edges of the rookeries or remain in tbe water, and are constantly trying to steal the females from their respective masters, who also rob each other of their families, by stealth or strength, whenever occasion offers; and thus an incessant quarrel is maintained at all points, which keeps the old males constantly on the alert. They never leave their places, seldom sleep, nor do they eat anything whatever during the entire season from May to August, when they go into the water; but, as far as can be ascertained, take no food until their final departure in November. It may be remarked, however, that they are very fet on arrival and quite as lean at the time of leaving in autumn. The young seals are supposed to feed while in the water, but this has not been definitely proved, nor is the nature of their food well known, since an examination of their stomachs seldom reveals more than a green mucilaginous matter. Following all others, the yearling seals arrive about the middle of July, accompanied by a few of the older males, and remain for the greater part of the time in the water. Soon after their arrival in the months of June and July the females bring forth their young." (Ex. Doc, 41st Congress, 2nd Session, No. 36, p. 14.) Reference has been made to the raids upon the rookeries, and to the fact that insufficient care has been taken of the breeding-ground. It is contended that it is the duty of the Government, drawing an enormous rental from these islands, to carefully guard and protect them, and it is undoubted that, with efficient protection, the increase of seal life will be more marvellous than ever. Mr. Tingle, in 1886, in his Report to Secretary Fairchild, urges the Government to keep a cutter around the islands from the 1 st July to the 1st November. Mr. Morgan, in 1888, in his evidence before Congress (p. 23), said there were not sufficient cutters for the protection of the islands, and Mr. Wardman, Special Agent of the Treasury at the islands, 1881 to 1885, said :— " I think the Government ought to keep at least one revenue-steamer therein and about these two islands up until the middle of October at least. The trouble has been in i he Revenue Marine Service. The appropriations were all right, and a fellow would be sent up to nominally protect the Seal Islands, but he would also be ordered to look for the North Pole as well as watch the Seal Islands. He might find the North Pole, but not around the Seal Islands. He would be away just at the time he would be needed around there." (Evidence before Congressional Committee, p. 38.) The Honourable Mr. Williams said:— "The Government practice, through the Treasury Department, has been to protect these waters so far as they could with the revenue-cutters which are at their command. Still it has frequently happened that a revenue-cutter goes upon the seal ground and then is ordered north for inspection, or for the relief of a whaling crew or something of that kind, and they are gone pretty much the whole time of the sealing season, and there seems to be an insufficiency in the method of protection." (Evidence before Congressional Committee, p. 106.) Mr. Taylor, Special Agent of the Treasury in 1881, said, before the same Committee (p. 58):— " The difficulty heretofore has been that our revenue-cutters have been obliged to cover a territory of 800 miles long and 700 or 800 miles wide, north and south, and they would get around to the Seal Islands about twice during a season. They never happened to be there when needed, and, as far as rendering any service whatever is concerned, they were practically useless so far as the Seal Islands were concerned. That has been the experience, I believe, of all who have been there." This officer recommended steam-launches for Government Agents at the islands. (Evidence before Congressional Committee, p. 109.) Mr. Glidden, another Agent of the Treasury from 1882 to 1885, says (Evidence, Congressional Committee, p. 28) when he was at the islands the Government kept no vessels there. " They landed our officers on a little island 6 miles from St. Paul to watch In every Report I made I recommended that they should keep a revenue-cutter there. One vessel cannot protect those islands and visit the Arctic Ocean besides. The cruizing-ground is far too' extensive, covering, as it does, a distance of several thousand miles, and while the cutter is absent in the Arctic much damage can be done by the marauding vessels to the Seal Islands." That Congress regarded it at the outset as the duty at least of the Administation to simply guard and regulate the islands, is clear from the Act first dealing with the subject. Mr. Boutwell, the Secretary of the Treasury, reported in 1870 (41st Congress, 2nd Session, Ex. Doc. No. 109) as follows :— " A suggestion has been made to this Department, in various forms, that the Government should lease these islands for a long period of time to a Company or firm for an annual sum of money, upon the condition that provision should be made for the subsistence and education of the natives, and that the fisheries themselves should be preserved from injury. This plan is open to the very grave objection that it makes a monopoly of a branch of industry, important not only for the people of the islands, but to the people of the United States, if the preparation and manufacture of the skins for use should be transferred from London to this * " In the stomach of one of these animals (year before last) fourteen small harp-seals were found.' Canadian Fisheries., 1873. -Michael Carroll's Report, 419 country. Such a monopoly is contrary to the ideas of the people, and not many yearswould pass before serious efforts would bo made for its overthrow. Moreover, the natives of the islands would be under the control of the Company, and as the expiration of the lease approached, the inducements to protect them and preserve the fisheries would diminish; especially if the Company saw, as would probably be the case, that it had no hope of a renewal of its privileges. Undoi- these circumstances the Government of the United States would necessarily be subjected to great expense and trouble. For these reasons, briefly stated, bnt valid, as they appear to me, I cannot concur in the suggestion that the islands should be leased to any Company for a period of years. Inasmuch as it will be necessary lor the Government of the United Slates to maintain in and around the islands a military and naval force for the protection of its interests under any plan that can he devised, 1 am cf opinion that it is better that the Government should assume the entire control of the business of the islands, and exclude everybody but its own servants and agents; that it should establish a rigid system of-police, excluding from the islands distilled spirits "and firc-urins, and subject vessels that touch there to forfeiture, except when they are driven to seek shelter or for necessary repairs. The conditions of such occupancy and control by the -Government of the United States seem to me to be these: — " 1st, the exclusion of other parties; 2nd, the supply to the natives of such articles as they are accustomed to use; 3rd, compensation to the natives for their labour, and the payment of a sufficient additional sum each year to enable them to live in the manner to which they have been accustomed j 4th, an equitable division of the value of the skins over the payments made to the natives, and the cost, to the Government of the United States of maintaining such force as is necessary for the protection of the business. " The portion of the surplus equitably belonging to the natives might be set aside for the purpose of education and religious teaching, the erection of more suitable dwellings than they now possess, and generally for their physical, intellectual, and moral improvement. " If the Government were to lease the islands it would not be possible to withdraw entirely the military and naval forces, or to ne?lect a careful supervision, and the additional expense consequent upon retaining possession of the business of the islands in the hands of the Government would not be large. "Ordinarily, I agree in the opinion that a Government, especially one like that of the United States, is not adapted to the management of business; but this clearly is a business which cannot be left open to individual competition, and if it is to be a monopoly, whether profitable or otherwise, the interest of the Government is so large, and. the expenses incident to the protection of these islands so great, that it cannot afford to substitute to any extent the monopoly of an individual or of a Company for its own lawful supervision. " Should the Government fail iu the attempt to manage the business through its own agents, there will then be opportunity to lease the fisheries to private parties; but my opinion is that a larger revenue can be obtained from them by actual management than by a lease. "In further reply to the Resolution, I have to say that the skins taken in 1868 were removed by Messrs. Kohl, Hutchinson, and Co., the Solicitor of the Treasury being of opinion that the Government had no legal authority to detain them. Those taken in 1869 are upon the islands, but no decision has been made touching the rights of the Government. " In concluding this Report I desire to call the attention of Congress to the fact that it is necessary to legislate immediately so far as to provide for the business of the present year. The natives will commence the capture of seals about the 1st June. " If the islands are to be leased for the present year it should be done immediately, that the lessee may make provision for the ' business of the year. If the business of the present year is to bo conducted by the Government, as I think it should be, whatever our future policy, legislation is necessary; and I suggest that the Secretary of the Treasury be authorized to appoint Agents in Alaska who shall be empowered to superintend the capture of the seals and the curing of the skins; and that an appropriation shall be made of 100,000 dollars, out of which the natives shall be paid for the labour performed by them, and the other expenses incident to the business met. " The Secretary of the Treasury should also be authorized to sell the skins at public auction or upon sealed proposals at San Francisco or New "York, as he may deem most for the interest of the Government. " It should be observed in this connection that the Government derived no benefit whatever from the seal fishery of the year 1868, and that the skins taken in 1869 arc, nominally at least, the property of two Companies, while the Government, during the last year, has furnished protection to the natives and the fishery, and has no assurance at present that it will derive any benefit whatever therefrom. "If legislation is long delayed the business of the year 1870 will be but a repetition of that of 1869." While the Canadian contention is supported, as has been seen, by many extracts from the Reports of officials of the United States' Government, it is apparent that the desire of the lessees, and indirectly that of the officials, has been to create a monopoly in the fur-seal industry, since in this way the market for the skins is largely enhanced aud the value of the islands greatly increased. This is, no doubt, one reason for the divergent opinions entertained as to the best Regulations for the preservation of seal life between those who control the islands and those who are compelled to hunt the seals in the ocean. In support of the above assertion the following authorities are in point:— Mr. Bryant, in 1869 (Senate Ex. Doe. No. 32, 41st Congress, 2nd Session), stated that the large nui'aber taken in 1807 and in 1868 decreased the London valuation to 3 and 4 dollars a skin. Mr. Moore, in a Report to the Secretary of the Treasury (H. R. Ex. Doc. No. 83, p. 196, 44th Congress, 1st Session), says, when alluding to the advisability of killing more seals than prescribed by the Act of the 1st July, 1870 :— " It seems that the iOO.OOO fur-seals from our own islands, together with the 30,000 obtained by them from the Asiatic islands, besides the scattering fur-seals killed in the South Seas, are all the market of the world can conveniently take. In fact, it is pretty evident that the very restriction of the numbers killed is about the most valuable part of the franchise of the Alaska Commercial Company, and it is only another proof of the absurdity of the frequent charges made against them that they surreptitiously take from our islands 20,000 or 30,000 more seals than they are entitled to take. " There does not exist any doubt, nor indeed is it denied by the Alaska Commercial Company, that the lease of the Islands of St. Paul and of St. George is highly lucrative. The great success of this franchise is, however, owing, as far as I could ascertain, to three principal causes: 1st, the Alaska Commercial Company, owing to the fact that they have the sole control of the three Asiatic islands on which fur-seals are found, as well as on our own islands, as St. Paul and St. George, virtually manage the sale of 80 per cent, of all the fur-seals killed annually in the world; 2ndly, the arbitrary and somewhat eccentric law of fashion has raised the price of fur-seals in the markets of the world during the last four years fully 100 per cent, in value; 3rdly, time and experience have given this controlling Company most valuable advantages. For instance, in the Island of St. Paul, where a reputed number of from 3 000,000 to 3,500,000 of seals congregate, the comparatively small quantity only of formerly 75,000 and now 90,000 are killed. The Company employs experts in selecting easily the kind that are the most valuable in the market, and have no difficulty in gettiug . 90,000 out of a flock of 3,000,000 to 3,500,000, which are the select of the select; and it is owing to this cause, and to the care taken in avoiding cuts in the skins, as also iu properly preparing them for the market, that the high prices are obtained. Indeed, the fact is that a fur-seal selling now in London for 21. 10s. or 3/. is, owing to its superior quality and excellent condition, cheaper than the fur-seals which five years ago fetched 30*. sterling. The former mode of the indiscriminate killing of fur-seals was as detrimental to the value of the skins as it was to the existence of the breed. With such a valuable franchise, secured by a contract that has still fifteen vears to run, bat which could, without notice, be terminated by the Secretary of the Treasury for cause, it would indeed be a suicidal policy on the part of the Company to infringe on the stipulations of the contract." All this is explained in the evidence before the Congressional Committee, pp. 77, 101, 105, and 121, where the Company is shown not to have taken the full quota in two years:— .:<•« iij^o|. because we could not get enough seals, but because tho market did not demand them. There were plenty of seals." (Evidence before Congressional Committee, p. 121.) [128] 3 M 450 1st1 Mr. Mclntyre, once a Special Agent, has already been quoted, and was afterwards in the service o the Company, reported, in 1869, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Mr. Blaine (H. R. E^, Doc. No. 36, 41st Congress, 2nd Session), that— " The number of skins that may be secured, however, should not be taken as the criterion on which to fix the limit of the yearly catch, but rather the demand of the market, keeping of course always within the annual production. It appears that under the Russian management a much larger number was sometimes killed than could be advantageously disposed of. Thus in 1803, after the slaughter had been conducted for some years without regard to the market, an accumulation of 800,000 skins was found in the storehouses on the islands, 700,000 of which were thrown into the sea as worthless. . At several times since that date the market has been glutted, and sales almost or quite suspended. A few months previously to the transfer of Alaska to the United States sealskins were worth in London only 1 dol. 50 c. to 3 dollars each,, and several thousand skins owned by the Russian-American Company were sold to parties in San Francisco, at the time of the transfer, at 50 cents to 1 dol. 25 c, a sum insufficient to pay the present cost of securing and transporting them to that city. Soon afterwards, however, fur-seal garments became fashionable in Europe, and in the expectation that the usual supply would be cut off by reason of the transfer of Alaska, prices advanced to 4 to 7 dollars per skin j ■ contrary to the expectation of dealers more than 200,000 skins were taken by the various parties engaged in the business on the islands in 1868, and the London price has declined to 3 to 4 dollars per skin; and I am assured that if the raw skins now held by dealers in London were thrown upon the market, a sufficient sum to pay the cost of transportation from the islands could hardly be realized. The number of raw skins now upon the market is not less than 350,000, and it is predicted that several years must elapse before the demand will again raise the price above the present rate, if indeed the large surplus of skins does not carry it much., lower before reaction begins." Many of the dangers to seal life have been mentioned, and it has been shown that the herd still thrives; but the wonderful productiveness of the seal is further shown by an allusion to a danger greater than all the assaults of man in the deep sea, a danger ever existing, which naturally tends to keep the seals inshore, or, when outside, to scatter. Reference is made to the killer-whales and sharks. (H. Ii. Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session, p. 177, and pp. 80, 87 of Appendix to the same document; also p. 359 of Evidence before Congressional Committee, 1888) :— " That these animals are preyed upon extensively by killer-whales (Orca%gladiator) in especial, and by sharks and probably other submarine foes now unknown, is at once evident; for were they not held in check by some such cause they would, as they exist to-day on St. Paul, quickly multiply, by arithmetical progression, to so great an extent that the island, nay, Behring's Sea itself, could not contain them. The present annual killing of 100,000 out of a yearly total of over 1,000,000 males does not in an appreciable degree diminish the seal life, or interfere in the slightest with its regular, sure perpetuation on the breeding-grounds every year. We may, therefore, properly look upon this aggregate of four and five millions of fur-seals as we see them every season on these Pribylov Islands as the maximum limit of increase assigned to them by natural laws. The great equilibrium which Nature holds in life upon this earth must be sustained at St. Paul as well as elsewhere." (Elliott's Report, pp. 62, 64.) " When before the Committee of Ways and Means on the 17th March, 1876, on the investigation before alluded to, Mr. Elliott made a similar statement, giving in somewhat greater detail the reasons for his conclusions. His evidence will be found annexed to the Report of the Committee." (Report No. 623, H. R., 44th Congress, 1st Session.) Respecting the practice of sealing as known in Canada, it may be said:— Canadian sealers start out upon their sealing voyages some time in the beginning of the year. The vessels go down to a point off San Francisco, and from thence work north. The seals taken by them off the coast are of both sexes, many in pup, some young bulls •; verjr few old bulls run in the Pacific' Ocean. The catch of each vessel will average between 500 and 700 seals a-year between the 1st January and the end of May. When an untrained crew is taken, many shots may be fired without hitting the seals at all, since the novice expects he can hit when at a considerable distance, the seals in such cases escaping entirely, but with Indian hunters and expert whites a seal is nearly always captured-when hit. An expert never shoots until after he has arrived at close quarters, and generally when the seal is asleep. In Behring's Sea the catch is made up largely of young bachelors. Sealing captains contend that no male becomes fit for the rookeries until 6 years of age. This contention is supported by the authorities to whom reference has already been made. It is further contended that should a temporary diminution of seal life become apparent upon the islands of the Pribylov group it would not follow that the herds were decreasing. Professor Elliott, in his Report of 1874 upon Alaska, so frequently referred to in this paper, argues, on pp. 265 and 266, that in such a case a corresponding augmentation may occur in Copper or Behring Island, since " these animals are not particularly attached to the respective places of their birth ":— " Thus it appears to me necessary that definite knowledge concerning the Commander Islands and the Kuriles should be possessed; without it, I should not hesitate to say that any Report made by an Agent of the Department as to a visible diminution of the seal life on the Pribylovs, due in his opinion to the effect of killing, as it is conducted, was without good foundation; that this diminution would have been noticed just the same in all likelihood had there been no taking of seals at all on the islands, and that the missing seals are more than probably on the Russian grounds." Note on the Question of the Protection of the Fur-Seal in the North Pacific. By Mr. George Dawson, D.S., F.G.S., F.R.S.C, F.R.M.S., Assistant Director of the Geological Survey of Canada.) The mode of protection which is apparently advocated by the United States' Government in the ■ case of the fur-seal, viz., that of leasing the privilege of killing the animal on the breeding-grounds and'. prohibiting its capture elsewhere, is a new departure in the matter of such protection. If, indeed, the whole sweep of the Pacific Ocean north of the Equator was dominated and effectively controlled by the United States, something might be said in favour of some such mode of protection from a commercial point of view, but in the actual circumstances the results would be so entirely in favour of the United ■ States, and so completely opposed to the interests and natural rights of citizens of all other countries, that it is preposterous to suppose that such a mode of protection of these animals can be maintained. Stated briefly, the position of the United States in the matter appears to be based on the idea of allowing, for a money consideration, the slaughter of the maximum possible number of seals compatible with the continued existence of the animals on the Pribylov Islands, while, in order that this number shall not be reduced, no sealing is to be permitted elsewhere. 451 t^ Such an a.ssumption^aiwhe>haaed^in.this*ase^on'One oirwotheaxjnly-of two^QnvdfM-^a'f'gf; 1. That Behring's Sea is a mare clausum. ^Q&r, 2. That each and every fur-seal is the property of the United States. Both claims have beem-made.in.QneJbrnajOkathei/.huLnfl^ formulated. The first is simply disproved by the geographical features of Behring's Sea, by the fact that this -sea and Behring's Strait conirilmteJha.openhighwiiy:t^ of : Canada, by the preyiou6-.aeiiota.of the_Ujiiled.Stotes'..Go.vernment.TChenthis,sea*waSineady!sm'jraujp.ded by Russian territory, and by the fact *.that from.. 1542. to., the.date of. the .purchase of Alaska fleets of United States' and other Avhalers.wereJaoax.ua,lly.engagecLin.Behring!s;=S£a... It is scarcely possible.-tb.at any serious attempt will.be..made..to support this contention. (Bancroft's.History, vol. xxxiii, Alaska, p. 583 et seq.) The second ground of claim is candidly,advancedhyPL W. Elliott, .who writes:— "The fur-seals of Alaska; colleetivelyoand individually, arc the properly of the General Government. . . . . Every fur-seal playing in the waters of Behring's Sea around about the Pribylov Islands,- no; matter if fmmd so doing 100 miles away from those rookeries, belongs there,'has been-begotten.and born thereon; and.is.the.animal.that.the.exnHcitshieul.of the-law■ protects/ No legal sophism or quibble can cloud the whole truth of my statement. The matter is, however, now thoroughly appreciated and understood at the Treasury Department; and has been during-the »pastwfour years, as --the -seal-pirates--have-discovered to their-chagrin and discomfiture." (United States^tiOth Censns, vol. viii, Fur-Sealrfalands, ju 157.) Waiving for the moment the general objection which may be. raised to. the. enforcement of such, a principle on the high seas,.an enforcement which the, United. States, in therinterest of the Alaska Fur Company, appear to have undertaken, the facts upon which, the. assumption are based may be questioned. Mr. Elliott, in fact, himself writes, on the .same page (referring to the presence of a large sealing fleet in Behring's Sea),.that it could not fail "in a few short years in so harassing and irritating the breeding seals as to cause -thefr.wthdra.wal from the.-Alaska. rookeries, and probable retreat to those of Russia, a source of undoubted Muscovite..delight, and..emolument, and of.corresponding loss and shame to us." This remark implies that ..the..seals jnay. r&sort. to either the, Pribylov or the. Russian, islands, according to eircumstances.-.-and:who -is..to. judge, in..the.ease of a particular .aaimal,.in-.which of these places it has been born? ..The old. theory,, that the seals returned .each year to the,same- spot, has-.been amply disproved. Elliott himself admits this, and it is confirmed (opu cit.,- p. 31) by Captain.. Charles Bryant, who resided eight years, imthe Pribylov Islands as Government,Agentjjanct.whoy.hawng marked 100 seals in 1870, on St. Paul Island, recognized,: the .next: year, four of them in different rookeries ion that island, and two on St.. George /Island (Monograph on-NorthAmerican 1'innipedeS; Allen,-188.0, p. 401.) It is, moreover, by no means eertain.that the fuivseals >breed.exclusivelyon bb&Russian and United States' Seal Islands of Behring's Sea, though these islands are no doubt their principal and important breeding-places. They were formerly, according to Capto.hu Shannon, found in considerable numbers ,on the coast of California;-and Captain Bryant was.credibly informed (" Marina Mammals of Coast of North-West North America,".pp. 152,. 15.4,, quoted- -by. Allen,, o/?.,c«£y p;-;332) of-the. existence iu recent years of small breeding .colonies .of ..these.animals.ou the.Queen.jQkarlotteIslands of>,British,Oolumbia Mr. Allen further quotes from rtho observations of .Mr. James ;,G., Swan,- Field Assistant of the.United States' Commissioner of.Fish. and .Fisheries:— " Mr. Swan " (I quote from Mr. Elliott), '' bus passed v.eiiv an ■ average lifetime on vhe north-west coast, and has rendered to natural science and to ethnology efficient and valuable sanvice." His statements may therefore be received-with respect. -..He writes:— "The fact that they (the fur-seals) do boar-pups:in:the.openi.-ocean> off-<Kuoa Strait; is.well established -by-the-evidence ofoevery one of the sealing captains, the Indians, and my own personal observations. Dr. Power says the facts do not admit of dispute. . . E . It seems ef- preposterous to my mind to suppose that all the fur-seals uf the North 1'acilie- go to the Pribylov Islands as to suppose that all tire salmon go to the Columbia or JFraser.River or to the Yukon." To this Professor D. S. Jordon,the<>w«H-known'natMipalJst/ adds :— "I may remark that I saw a live fur-seal pup at -Cape-Flattery* takett.from.au old.seal4^t.kjllad,:sha»ing;that the,iime-of bringing them forth was just at hand." On these statements Mr. Allfindiu^isel&rftmaisks:— " These observations, aside from the judicious.9nggestaon8jmade<bjiMrv;Swan, are of special interest as confirming those'made some years ago by Captain Bryant,.uud already briefly recorded in this work. They^eem-to.sho.w -that* at-least a-certain number of fur-seals repair to secluded places, suited to their -needs, as for south as the latitude of -.Capo Flattery, to bring forth their young." (Allen, op. cit., pp. 411, 772, 773.) Mr. Elliott, of course, stoutly denies the authenticity of .all these observations, it being necessary to do so in order to maintainhis>contention-.as;to. the; ownership of the United States' Government, or the Alaska Fur Company, as the-ease may be, in the-seals. It has further been often stated that the lolling of fur-seals in the open sea off the North Pacific coast is a comparatively new departure; while it is, .as a matter of fact, morally, certain that the Indians of the whole length of that coast.have <pursued and killed these animals from time immemorial. As the value of the skins has, however, only of late years become fully known and appreciated, it is naturally difficult to obtain much trustworthy evidence of this without considerable research. Some facts can, however, be adduced. Thus, Captain Shannon described the mode of hunting seals in canoes employed by the Indians of Vancouver Island, and refers to the capture of seals by the Indians off the Straits of Fuca, where, he adds, they appear— \ " Some years as early as the 1st March, and more or less remain, till July or August, but they are most plentiful in April and Mav. During these two months the Indians devote nearly all their time to sealing when the weather will permit." [128] 3 M 2 452 In 1843 to 1864 only a few dozen skins are known to have been taken annually, but in 1869 fully 5,000 were obtained. Mr. Allen, writing in 1880, states that — " During the winter months considerable numbers of sealskins are taken by the natives of British Columbia, some years as many as 2,000." (Alien, op. cit., pp. 332, 371, 411.) tllfll m 11 J IP il in The protection of the fur-seals from extermination has from time to time been speciously advanced as a sufficient reason for extraordinary departures from the respect usually paid to private property and to international rights; but any protection based on the lease of the breeding-grounds of these animals as places of slaughter, and an attempt to preserve the seals when at large and spread over the ocean, as they are during the greater part of each year, is unfair in its operation, unsound in principle, and impracticable in enforcement. Referring to the interests of the Indians of the north-west coast, it is true that a certain number of Aleuts now on the Pribylov Islands (398 in all, according to Elliott) are dependent on the sealing business for subsistence, but these islands were uninhabited when discovered by the Russians, who brought these people here for their own convenience. Further south along the coast the natives of the Aleutian Islands, of the south-east coast of Alaska, and of the entire coast of British Columbia have been, and still are, accustomed annually to kill considerable numbers of seals. This it would be unjust to interfere with, even were it possible to carry out any regulations with that effect. The furtner development of oceanic sealing affords employment to, and serves as a mode of advancement and civilization for, these Indians, and is one of the natural industries of the coast. No allusion need be made to the prescriptive rights of the white sealers, which are well known. The unsoundness of this principle of conservation is shown by what has occurred in the Southern Hemisphere in respect to the fur-seals of that region. About the beginning of the century very productive sealing-grounds existed in the Falkland Islands, Kerguelen Islands, Georgian Islands, the west coast of Patagonia, and many other places similarly situated, all of which were in the course of a few years almost absolutely stripped of seals, and in many of which the animal is now practically extinct. This destruction of the southern fur-sealing trade was not caused by promiscuous sealing at sea, but entirely by hunting on and around the shores, and, had these islands been protected as breeding-places, the fur-seals wordd in all probability be nearly as abundant in the south to-day~as they were at the date at which the trade commenced. The impracticability of preventing the killing of seals on the open sea, and of efficiently patrolling the North Pacific for this purpose, is sufficiently obvious. The seals, moreover, when at sea (in marked contrast with their boldness and docility in their breeding-places) are extremely wary, and the number which can be obtained by legitimate hunting at sea must always be small as compared with the total. Elliott, in fact, states that the seal, when at sea, " is the shyest and wariest your ingenuity can define." (Op. cit., p. 65.) The position is such that at the present time the perpetuation or the extermination of the fur-seal in the North Pacific as a commercial factor practically depends entirely on the regulations and restrictions which may be applied by the United States to the Pribylov Islands, and now that this is understood a regard for the general interest of its own citizens, as well as for those of other countries, demands that the extermination or serious depletion of the seals on their breeding-islands should be prevented. It is probably not necessary for this purpose that the killing of seals on these islands should be entirely prohibited. Both Elliott and Bryant show good reason for believing that a large number of seals may be killed annually without reducing the average aggregate number which can find suitable breeding-grounds on these islands, and after the very great reduction in numbers which . occurred, owing to an inclement season about 1836 (Elliott), or 1842 (Bryant), the seals increased very rapidly again, and in a few years being nearly as numerous as in 1873, when the total number on the islands was estimated at over 4,700,000. By retaining an efficient control of the number of seals to be killed on the Pribylov Islands, and by fixing this number anew each season in accordance with circumstances, the United States' Government will be in a position to counteract the effect of other causes, tending to diminish the number of seals, whether climatic or resulting from the killing of a larger number at sea. There is no reason to apprehend that the number of seals which might thus be safely killed on the islands would, under any circumstances, be so small as to fail to cover the cost of the administration and protection of the islands. If such a policy as this, based on the common interests in the preservation of the seals, were adopted, it might be reasonable to agree (for the purpose of safeguarding the islands and for police purposes) that the jurisdiction of the United States in this matter should be admitted to extend to some greater distance than this usual one of 3 marine miles, though, as shown further on, the necessary distance would not be great. The situation of the Pribylov Islands and the habits of the seal together cause the problem of its preservation to be one of extreme simplicity if approached from the point of view of protection on and about the islands, but one of very great difficulty if looked at from any other standpoint. The long- continued and presumably accurate observations which have been made on the habits of the seals show that during the entire breeding season they are very closely confined to the immediate shores of the breeding islands, and that neither in arriving nor in "departing from these islands do they form schools )r appear together in such numbers as to render promiscuous slaughter at sea possible. The old bulls actually remain on shore during the entire breeding season, while the females, though leaving their young from time to time for the water, are described as haunting the immediate vicinity of the shores just beyond the line of surf. Even the bachelor seals (Elliott, op. cit., pp. 45, 64, et passim; Allen, op. cit, p. 386), which constitute a distinct body while ashore and are not actually engaged in breeding or protecting the young, are said to remain close to the shore. If, however, any seals are to be found at this time going to or returning from the sea at some distance from land, these belong to the " bachelor " class, which is the very class selected for the killing by the fur Company. The young 453 females, after leaving the islands in the year of their birth, do not return at all till after reaching maturity in their third year. (Allen, op. cit., p. 402.) The evidence obtained by Captain Bryant shows that while "small groups of small seals (apparently 1 and 2 years old)" are met with at large in Behring's Sea during July and August, no considerable numbers of schools are to be founel. (Allen, op. cit., p. 411.) It is thus apparent that the perfect security of the seals actually engaged in breeding and suckling their young may be secured without extending the limits of protection beyond the usual distance of 3 miles from the shores of the breeding islands, but that for the purpose of increasing the facilities of supervision a somewhat wider limit might reasonably be accorded. Possibly by defining an area inclosed by lines joining points 3 miles off the extreme headlands and iidets of the Pribylov group, an ample and unobjectionable area of protection might be established. It is allowed by all naturalists that the habits of the fur-seals of the Southern Hemisphere are identical with those of the seal of the North Pacific, and it is therefore admissible to quote the observations of Dampier on Juan Fernandez Island in further confirmation of the fact that these animals go only for a very short distance from land during the breeding season, even when in immense multitudes on the shore. Dampier writes:— " Here are always thousands, I might say possibly millions of them, either sitting on the bays or going and coming in the sea round the islands, which is covered with them (as they lie at the top of the water playing and sunning themselves) for a mile or two from the shore." ("A New Voyags Round the World," 1703; quoted by Allen, op. cit., p. 334.) These rookeries have, like others in the south, been long since depleted and abandoned. The circumstance that the female fur-seal becomes pregnant within a few days after the birth of its young, and that the period of gestation is nearly twelve months, with the fact that the skins are at all times fit for market (though for a few weeks, extending from the middle of August to the end of September, during the progress of the shedding and renewal of the longer hair, they are of less value) show that there is no natural basis for a close season generally applicable. Thus, should any close season be advocated, its length and the time of year during which it shall occur can only be determined as a matter of convenience and be of the nature of a compromise between the various interests involved. The pelagic "habits of the seals during fully six months of each year, and the fact that they are during the entire winter season widely dispersed over the Pacific, constitute a natural and unavoidable close season, It is thus only possible, from a commercial point of view, to kill the seals during the period of their approximate concentration for migration or when in Behrin gs bea. This is the period fixed by Nature during which seals may be taken, and any artificial close season can be effective only n j applied to the further curtailment of the time at which it is possible to carry on the fishery. It may- he assumed, therefore, as such a close season for seal-hunting at sea must be purely arbitrary and artificial, that any close season proposed by the United States or the lessees of the Seal Islands will be chosen entirely in the interest of sealing on shore, and so arranged as to render the time of sealing on the open sea as short and unprofitable as possible. It is thus important that the sea-going sealers should at least have an equal voice in the matter of the time and duration of a close period if such should be contemplated. (Signed) GEORGE M. DAWSON March 5, 1890. No. 322. . Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 26.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, April 26, 1890. I HAVE received the amendments proposed by the Canadian Government in my new draft Convention referred to in my despatch of the 11th instant. I propose to submit the draft Convention to the Conference on Tuesday, with the amendments, unless your Lordship instructs me otherwise. No. 323. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received April 30.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, April 30, 1890. I HAVE sent the draft Convention to Mr. Blaine, with a letter supporting our counter-proposal. I sent your Lordship copies by post yesterday. 454 No. 324. ?M Sir J. Pauncefote to'the>sMm»qwi>s ofoSaHsfatry.—^(Recewed^May'5.) My Lord, Washington, April 25,-1890.1 IN obedience to your Lordship's instructions conveyed to me in your telegram of the 15th March, I have the honour to inform you, that Lcommunicated copies of,.my despatches of the 7th and 11th February, respecting the assessment of damagesi-ijor seizure in Behring's Sea, to Mr. Tupper, in order that he migbt'fconsult his colleagues on the subject during his visit to Ottawa. I have now the honour to inclose a copy of the letter in which he informs-me ol the views of the Dominion Government as to the procedure to be followed. From this letter it appears .that..the Canadian Government desire that I should endeavour to assess the amount of damages with Mr. Blaine, but that they would prefer a modification of the procedure suggested on the proposed reference to arbitration. 1 have the honour to request that I may be informed whether your Lordship approves of the modification in Mr. Blaine's proposal suggested by the Canadian Goveiuir ment, and, if so, whether I am authorized to accept that proposal as so modified on behalf of Her Majesty's Government. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. ■ - Inclosure in No. 324. Mr. Tupper to Sir J. Pauncefote. Dear Sir Julian Pauncefote^fefeS Washington, April 19, 1890. ! REFERRING to the copies, of your despatches of the 7th and 11th February, •addressed to Lord. Sa^bairy^;andt.wlflich'-youijiianded-i-ttQ>ime, I have, now to informyou tbat during my visits-jfeoi 0&amradEfrdis€iassed>"tifl}itli mysaJslteagvaeSiUfchftftSiujaflect toaayhich they refer. In the despatch of the T-tlS^Febraary you say(<M$J$^i«e«wa*<mqffi»g ." toojgxamine and assess the damages.with me■ onithersame^principle as if the liability of- his Government were admitted, then to refer the question of liability to some eminent jurisconsult for decision on written statements^ and answers submitted by the two Governments respectively." It will be agreeable to the Canadian Government that you should endeavour to assess the amount of damages with Mr. Blaine. Touching Mr. Blaine's proposal for ascertaining the liability, my colleagues think that it would be preferable to the mode suggested that a statement of the case should be made, setting out all the facts connected -with the action.of the Revenue cutters of the United States concerning Canadian sealing-vessels, their crews, cargoes, papers, &c, in Behring's Sea, and the question propounded upon such a statement should be whether the conduct of the Un#©d»Statescttnhtherrpr«miiBe«i;^^ of international or natuiraMaw.rv The question " on vgfsAteh' ^atemi©ffifc&fc(a<Etd answers submitted ibyi&h<& Govemm/snfe respectively" should be submitted to two eminent Judges, oneitoribe-jrisay, the .Chief Justice of the United States, the other an eminent member of the English Judiciary, to be named by the British Government. Yours, &c. (Signed) CH. H. TUPPEE. No. 325. Foreign Office to Colonial Office. Sir, 1'Foreign Office, May 5, 1890. WITH reference to your letter of the 14th March last, I am directed by the Marquis of Salisbury to transmit herewith a copy of a despatch from Her Majesty's Minister at Washington,* inclosing a copy of a letter addressed to him by Mr. Tupper, explaining the views of the Dominion Government as to the procedure to be followed in * No. 324. 455 the proposed assessment of damages claimed on behalf of the owners of the British vessels seized in Behring's Sea. I am to request that, in laying this letter before Secretary Lord Knutsford, you will move him to furnish Lord Salisbury with any observations he may have to offer in regard to the modifications in Mr. Blaine's proposal suggested by the Canadian Government. I am, &c. (Signed) P. CURRIE. No. 326. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.— (Received May 8.) My Lord, ' Washington, April 29, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 11th instant, I have the honour to- inclose copy of a letter which I have this day addressed to Mr. Blaine, inclosing the draft of a Convention which I have prepared for the settlement of the Behring's Sea Fisheries question, and which has the approval of the Canadian Government. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 1 in No. 326. Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Dear Mr. Blaine, Washington, April 29, 1890. AT the last sitting of the Conference on the Behring's Sea Fisheries question you, expressed doubts, after reading the Memorandum of the Canadian Minister of Marine, and Fisheries, which by your courtesy has since been printed, whether any arrangement could be arrived at that would be satisfactory to Canada. Tou observed that the proposal of the United States had now been two years before Her Majesty's Government; that there was nothing further to urge in support of it, and- you invited me to make a counter-proposal on your behalf. To that task I have most- earnestly applied myself, and while fully sensible of its great difficulty, owing to the conflict of opinion and of testimony which has manifested itself in the course of our discussions, I do not despair of arriving at a solution which will be satisfactory to all the Governments concerned. It has been admitted from the commencement that the sole object of the negotiation is the preservation of the fur-seal species for the benefit of- mankind, and that no considerations of advantage to any particular nation or of benefit, to any private interest should enter into the question. Such being the basis of negotiation, it would be strange, indeed, if we should fail tor devise the means of solving the difficulties which have unfortunately arisen. I will proceed to explain by what method this result can, in my judgment, be attained. The great divergence of views which exists as to whether any restrictions on pelagic sealing are necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species, and, if so, as to the character and extent of such restrictions, render it impossible, in my opinion, to arrive at any solution which would satisfy public opinion either in Canada or Great Britain, or in any country which may be invited to accede to the proposed arrangement, without a full inquiry by a Mixed Commission of Experts, the result of whose labours and investigations in the region of the seal fishery would probably dispose of all the points in dispute. As regards the immediate necessities of the case, I am prepared to recommend to my Government, for their approval and acceptance, certain measures of precaution which might be adopted provisionally and without prejudice to the ultimate decision on the points to be investigated by the Commission. These measures, which I will explain later' on, would effectually remove all reasonable apprehension of any depletion of the fur-seal species, at all events pending the Report of the Commission. It is important in this relation to note that while it has been contended on the part of the United States' Government that the depletion of the fur-seal species has already commenced, and even that the extermination of the species is threatened within at measurable space of time, the latest Reports of ihe United States' Agent, Mr. Tingle,- are such as to dissipate all such alarms. Mr. Tingle, in 1887, reported that the vast number of seals was on the increase, and that the condition of all the rookeries could not be better. 456 MM In his later Report, dated the 31st July, 1888, he wrote as follows:— 11 am happy to be able to report that, although late landing, the breeding rookeries are filled out to the lines of measurement heretofore made, and some of them much beyond those lines, showing conclusively that seal life is not being depleted, but is fully rup to the estimate given in my Report of 1887." Mr. Elliot, who is frequently appealed to as a great authority on the subject, .-affirms that such is the natural increase of the fur-seal species that these animals, were they not preyed upon by killer-whales (Orca gladiator), sharks, and other submarine foes, would multiply to such an extent that "Behring's Sea itself could not contain them." The Honourable Mr. Tupper has shown in his Memorandum that the destruction of -seals caused by pelagic sealing is insignificant in comparison with that caused by their natural enemies; and he gives figures exhibiting the marvellous increase of seals in spite of the depredations complained of. Again, the destructive nature of the modes of killing seals by spears and fire-arms has apparently been greatly exaggerated, as may be. seen from the affidavits of practical seal-hunters which I annex to this letter,* together with a confirmatory extract from a paper upon the "Fur Seal Fisheries of the Pacific. Coast and Alaska," prepared and published in San Francisco, and designed for the information of Eastern United States' Senators and Congressmen. The Canadian Government estimate the percentage of seals so wounded or killed and not recovered at 6 per cent. In view of the facts above stated, it is improbable that pending the result of the inquiry which I have suggested any appreciable diminution of the fur-seal species should take place, even if the existing conditions of pelagic sealing were to remain unchanged. But in order to quiet all apprehension on that score I would propose the following provisional Regulations:—- 1. That pelagic sealing should be prohibited in the Behring's Sea, the Sea of ■Ochotsk, and the adjoining waters, during the months of May and June, and the months •of October, November, and December, which may be termed the " migration periods " of the fur-seal. 2. That all sealing-vessels should be prohibited from approaching the breeding islands within a radius of 10 miles. These Regulations would put a stop to the two practices complained of as tending to exterminate the species; (1) the slaughter of female seals with young during migration periods, " especially in the narrow passes of the Aleutian Islands; (2) the destruction of female seals by marauders surreptitiously landing on the breeding islands under cover of the dense fogs which almost continuous!}' prevail in that locality during the summer. Mr. Taylor, another Agent of the United States' Government, asserts that the female seals (called " cows ") go out from the breeding islands every day for food. The following is an extract from his evidence. " The cows go 10 and 15 miles, and even further—I do hot know the average of it—and they are going and coming all the morning and evening. The sea is black with them round about the islands. If there is a little fog, and they get out half-a-mile from> shore, we cannot see a vessel 100 yards even. The vessels themselves lay around the islands there, where they pick up a good many seal, and there is where the killing of cows occurs when they go ashore." Whether the female seals go any distance from the islands in quest of food, and, if so, to what distance, are questions in dispute. But, pending their solution, the Regulation which I propose against the approach of sealing-vessels within 10 miles of the islands for> the prevention, of surreptitious landing practically meets Mr. Taylor's complaint, be it well founded or not, to the fullest extent; for, owing to the prevalence of fogs, the risk of capture within a radius of 10 miles will keep vessels off at a much greater distance. This Regulation, if accepted by Her Majesty's Government, would certainly manifest a friendly desire on their part to co-operate with your Government and that of Russia in the protection of their rookeries, and in the prevention of any violation of the Laws applicable thereto. I have the honour to inclose the draft of a Preliminary Convention which I have prepared, providing for the appointment of a Mixed Commission, who are to report on certain specified questions within two years. The draft embodies the temporary Regulations above described, together with other clauses which appear to me necessary to give proper effect to them. Although I believe that it would be sufficient during the migration periods " to * See Appendix 1 in Colonial Office letter of November 30, 1889, pp. 355-357: 457 prevent all sealing within a specified distance from the passes of the Aleutian Islands, I have, out of deference to your views and to the wishes of the Russian Minister, adopted the fishery line described in Article V, and which was suggested by you at the outset of our negotiation. The draft, of course, contemplates the conclusion of a further Convention, after full examination of the Report of the Mixed Commission. It also makes provision for the ultimate settlement by arbitration of any differences which the Report of the Commission may still fail to adjust, whereby the important element of finality is secured; and in order to give to the proposed arrangement the widest international basis, the draft provides that the other Powers shall be invited to accede to it. The above proposals are, of course, submitted ad referendum, and it only now remains for me to commend them to your favourable consideration and to that of the Russian Minister. They have been framed by me in a spirit of justice and conciliation, and with the most earnest desire to terminate the controversy in a manner honourable to all parties, and worthy of the three great nations- concerned. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 2 in No. 326. The North American Seal Fishery Convention. Draft Convention between Great Britain, Russia, and the United States of America, in relation to the Fur-seal Fishery in the Behring's Sea, the Sea of Ochotsk, and the adjoining Waters. THE Governments of Russia and of the United States having represented to the Preamble. Government of Great Britain the urgency of regulating, by means of an International Agreement, the fur-seal fishery in Behring's Sea, the Sea of Ochotsk, and the adjoining waters, for the preservation of the fur-seal species in the North Pacific Ocean, and differences of opinion having arisen as to the necessity for the proposed Agreement, in consequence whereof the three Governments have resolved to institute a full inquiry into the subject, and pending the result of such inquiry, to adopt temporary measures for the restriction of the killing of seals during the breeding season without prejudice to the ultimate decision of the questions in difference in relation to the said fishery ; The said three Governments have appointed as their respective Plenipotentiaries, to wit: Who, after having exchanged their full powers, which were found to be in good and due form, have agreed upon the following Articles:— ARTICLE I. The High Contracting Parties agree to appoint a Mixed Commission of Experts, Mixed Com- who shall inquire fully into the subject, and report to the High Contracting Parties within mission of two years from the date of this Convention the result of then: investigations, together ExPe.rtst°b<J with their opinions and recommendations on the following questions :-— 1. Whether Regulations properly enforced upon the breeding islands (Robin Island in the Sea of Ochotsk, and the Commander Islands and the Pribyloff Islands in the Behring's Sea) and in the territorial waters surrounding those islands are sufficient for the preservation of the fur-seal species. 2. If not, how far from the islands is it necessary that such Regulations should be enforced in order to preserve the species ? 3. In either of the above cases, what should such Regulations provide ? 4. If a close season is required on the breeding islands and territorial waters, whar months shpuld it embrace ? 5. If a close season is necessary outside of the breeding islands as well, what extent of waters and what period or periods should' it embrace P [128] 3 N 3n receipt of Report of Commission, question of [nterna- | tional Regulations to be forthwith determined. I Arbitration. 458 ARTICLE II. On receipt of the Report of the Commission, and of any separate Reports which may be made by individual Commissioners, the High Contracting Parties will proceed- forthwith to determine what International Regulations, if any, are necessary for the purpose aforesaid, and any Regulations so agreed upon shall be embodied in a further Convention, to which the accession of the other Powers shall be invited. ARTICLE III. In case the High Contracting Parties should be unable to agree upon the Regulations to be ad'opted, the questions in difference shall be referred to the arbitration of an impartial Government, who shall duly consider the Reports hereinbefore mentioned, and whose award shall be final, and shall determine the conditions of the further Convention. ARTICLE IV. i Provisional Pending the Report of the Commission, and for six months after the date of such Regulations. Report, the High Contracting Parties agree to adopt and put in force as a temporary measure, and without prejudice to the ultimate decision of any of the questions in difference in relation to the said fishery, the Regulations contained in the next following Articles Nos. V to X inclusive. ARTICLE V. A line of demarcation, to be called the "seal fishery line," shall be drawn as follows:— From Point Anival at the southern extremity of the Island of Saghalien in the*Sea of Ochotsk, to the point of intersection of the 50th parallel of north latitude with the 160th meridian of longitude east from Greenwich, thence eastward along the said 50th parallel to its point of intersection with the 160th meridian of longitude west from Greenwich. ARTICLE VI. Close time. The subjects and citizens of the High Contracting Parties shall be prohibited from engaging in the fur-seal fishery and the taking of seals by land or sea north of the seal fishery line from the 1st May to the 30th June, and also from the 1st October to the 30th December. ARTICLE VII. Preven- During the intervening period, in order more effectively to present the surreptitious tion of landing of marauders on the said breeding islands, vessels engaged in the fur-seal I marauders, fishery, and belonging to the subjects and citizens of the High Contracting Parties, shall be prohibited from approaching the said islands within a radius of 10 miles. ARTICLE VIII. Further The High Contracting Parties may, pending the Report of the Commission, and on provisional its recommendation or otherwise, make such further temporary Regulations as may be | Regulations, deemed by them expedient for better carrying out the provisions of this Convention and the purposes thereof. ARTICLE IX. Seal fishery ■ line. m Penalty for violation of provisional • Regulations. Seizure for breach of provisional Regulations. Trial of offences. Every vessel which shall be found engaged in the fur-seal fishery contrary to the prohibitions provided for in Articles VI and "VII, or in violation of any Regulation made under Article VIII, shall, together with her apparel, equipment, and contents, be liable to forfeiture and confiscation, and the master and crew of such vessel, and every person belonging thereto, shall be liable to fine and imprisonment. ARTICLE X. Every such offending vessel or person may be seized and detained by the naval or other duly commissioned officers of any of the High Contracting Parties, but they shall be handed over as soon as practicable 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, and the Court adjudicating upon the case may order such portion of the fines imposed, or of the proceeds of the condemned vessel, to be applied in payment of the expenses occasioned thereby. fiwiwtetffii 459 ARTICLE XL | This Convention shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at Ratification.] in six months from the date thereof, or sooner if possible. It shall take effect on such Commence-;! day as shall be agreed upon by the High Contracting Parties, and shall remain in force ment .and until the expiration of six months after the date of the Report of the Commission of Contention/ Experts to be appointed under Article I; but its duration may be extended by consent. ARTICLE XII. The High Contracting Parties agree to invite the accession of the other Powers to Accession the present Convention. ?f other rowers. Inclosure 3 in No. 326 Extract from a Pamphlet entitled "Fur-seal Fisheries of the Pacific Coast and Alaska." Published by C. D. Ladd. IT is claimed that many seals are shot that sink and are lost. Undoubtedly there are some lost in this way, but the percentage is light, probably one in thirty or forty, not more than this. It is also claimed that ten are shot and wounded that die to one that is secured. This is also an error. Many seals are shot at that are not hit at all, but when a seal is wounded, so that in the end it will die, it is most always secured by the hunter, who may have to shoot at it several times in order to get it, as the seal in the water exposes only its head, and when frightened exposes only a small portion of that, so that, together with the constant diving of the seal, the motion of the boat, &c, makes it very hard to hit. This is where it is claimed that ten are shot and wounded to one that is secured, but it is nearer the truth that one is lost to ten that are secured, for the reason that when a seal is wounded it cannot remain under water any length of time, and therefore the hunter can easily follow it up and secure it. No. 327. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.— (Received May 8.) Sir, Downing Street, May 8, 1890. IN reply to your letter of tbe 5th instant, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to acquaint you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, that he does not see any reason for taking exception to the proposal of the Dominion Government that the question of the liability of the United States' Government to pay compensation in respect of the seizures in Behring's Sea should be submitted to two eminent Judges instead of the single jurisconsult proposed by Mr. Blaine, if provision is made for securing a final decision in the event of a difference of opinion between the Judges chosen, by a reference to an umpire to be selected by the two Judges before the arbitration is commenced. With regard to the question to be submitted to the arbitrators, Lord Knutsford would suggest that Her Majesty's Government should deprecate the employment of so vao-ue and elastic a term as "natural law." I am to point out, also, that Mr. Blaine, in the conversation with Sir J. Pauncefote reported in tbe latter's despatch of the 7th February last, stated that no established principles of international law would be in dispute, and he would probably object, therefore, to a specific reference to international law. It appears to Lord Knutsford also to deserve consideration whether Mr. Tupper's proposed form of question does not narrow rather than extend the range of acts for which the United States should be held responsible, as it is not impossible that, by ingenious argument, the arbitrators might be persuaded that proceedings otherwise not justifiable were excusable under some alleged doctrine of international law. Lord Knutsford is disposed, therefore, to prefer the broader terms of reference suggested by Mr. Blaine in the Memorandum which he communicated to Sir J. Pauncefote on the 11th February last, namely, whether, under the circumstances existing at the time, the United States' Government was justified in arresting and detaining the vessels that entered the Behring's Sea for the purpose of killing fur-seals in the open sea. This would not prevent Her Majesty's Government from invoking the principles of international law against the United States' action, as indeed it is proposed to do in the reply [128] 3 N 2 »■ 460 to be given to Mr. Blaine's note of the 22nd January, setting forth the grounds upon which he rests the justification of the seizures. I am to observe, further, that Mr. Tupper does not say in his letter whether the Dominion Government are willing that the question of the amount of the damages, in the event of Mr. Blaine and Sir J. Pauncefote failing to agree, should be referred to the arbitrators to be selected to determine the question of the liability of the United States. Lord Knutsford would suggest, for Lord Salisbury's consideration, that Sir J. Pauncefote should be desired to communicate with Mr. Tupper as to the points raised in this letter before submitting the matter to the United States' Government. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. No. 328. The Marquis of Salisbmy to Sir J. Pauncefote, (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, May 8, 1890. WHAT reception has Mr. Blaine given to the proposals embodied in the draft Convention for regulating the Behring's Sea fur-seal fisheries which was sent home in your despatch of the 29th ultimo ? Her Majesty's Government would be glad to be kept informed by telegraph of any advance in the negotiations. wm$ No. 329. -Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 8.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, May 8, 1890. TOUR Lordship's telegram of to-day's date received. I will telegraph without fail as soon as I receive any communication from Mr. Blaine as to his views on the draft Convention. Although as friendly as ever in manner, he has hitherto maintained absolute silence on the subject. Would your Lordship authorize fee to inform him that you approve the draft, and hope that it will be accepted by the United States' Government ? The desired information may thus be elicited. No. 330. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, May 9, 1890. I HAVE received your telegram of to-day, and, in reply, I have to inform you that you are authorized, if you think it advisable, to inform Mr. Blaine that Her Majesty's Government approve the terms of the draft Convention submitted to him by you for the regulation of the Behring's Sea fur-seal fisheries. No. 331. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote.—(Substance telegraphed.) Sir, Foreign Office, May 9, 1890. I LOST no time in communicating to the Secretary of Slate for the Cojkmptes copies of your despatch of the 25th ultimo, and its inclosure, relative to the j a^sessrn&nt of compensation for %& seizures by United States' vessels of BritagJ^;sgaJ.ers in Be^jmjgs Sea; and I now trapsmit, for your information and guidance, a, cc-gj^oji abetter cq^ajnjgg Lord Knutsford's vie$rsk.on the* matter.* * No. 327. 461 As it is very desirable that the negotiations how pending should be brought to as -early a conclusion as possible,-1 telegraphed the substance of the Colonial Office letter to you this day, desiring you to consult Mr. Tupper on its contents before approaching the United States' Government in regard to them. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 332. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, May 10, 1890. I HAVE received your despatch of the 29th ultimo, covering copy of a note in which you submitted to Mr. Blaine the draft Convention, which has been approved by the Government of Canada, for the settlement of the Behring's Sea Fisheries question, as well as a copy of the draft Convention itself. The terms of your note are approved by Her Majesty's Government. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 333. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 1 1.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, May 11, 1890. WITH reference to my telegram of the 8th instant, Mr. Blaine has informed m,e that he will send me a communication before the end of the week, in which he will explain why the United States' Government are unable to accept my draft Convention in its present shape. He told me, however, at the same time, that he thought a basis of arrangement was offered by my proposal which he was in hopes would lead to a settler ment of the question. No. 334. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 11.) {Telegraphic.) Washington, May 11, 1890. AS to compensation for damages referred to in your .Lordship's telegram of the 9th instant, I have prepared, after discussion with .Air. Tupper, a draft Arbitration Agreement on the basis of your Lordship's instructions. Mr. Tupper will to-morrow take a copj' of it to Ottawa for the approval of the Canadian Government, and should his further services be required here, will return immediately. As soon as I receive the reply of the Canadian Government, I will forward copy to your Lordship. Proposal for arbitrators and umpire will be agreed to by Mr. Blaine. No. 335. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received'May 14.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, May 14,189.0. M3$. TUPPER did not leave for Ottawa as stated in my telegram of the 11th instant. Draft Agreement was.sent there by post instead of being taken by him. 462 ■-i>...;. :St SfH fHBItHHB No. 336. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, May 22, 1890. I RECEIVED in due course your despatch of tbe 23rd January,* inclosing copy of Mr. Blaine's note of the 22nd of that month, in answer to the protest made on behalf of Her Majesty's Government on the 12th October last against the seizure of Canadian vessels by the United States' Revenue-cutter "Rush" in Behring's Sea. The importance of the subject necessitated a reference to the Government of Canada, and some time elapsed before their reply reached Her Majesty's Government. The negotiations which have taken place between Mr. Blaine and yourself afford strong reason to hope that the difficulties attending this question are in a fair way towards an adjustment which will be satisfactory to both Governments. I think it right, however, to place on record, as briefly as possible, the views of Her Majesty's Government on the- principal arguments brought forward on behalf of the United States. Mr. Blaine's note defends the acts complained of by Her Majesty's Government on the following grounds: — 1. That I the Canadian vessels arrested and detained in the Behring's Sea were engaged in a pursuit that is in itself contra bonos mores—a pursuit which of necessity involves a serious and permanent injury to the rights of the Government and people of the United States." i.. That the fisheries had been in the undisturbed possession, and under the exclusive control, of Russia from their discovery until the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867, and that from this date onwards until ls86 they had also remained in the undisturbed possession of the United States' Government. 3. That it is a fact now held beyond denial or doubt that the taking of seals in the- open sea rapidly leads to the extinction of the species, and that therefore nations not possessing the territory upon which seals can increase their numbers by natural growth should refrain from the slaughter of them in the open sea. Mr. Blaine further argues that the law of the sea and the liberty which it confers do not justify acts which are immoral in themselves, and which inevitably tend to results against the interests and against the welfare of mankind ; and he proceeds to justify the forcible resistance of the United States' Government by the necessity of defendiag not only their own traditional and long-established rights, but also the rights of good morals and of good government the world over. He declares that while the United States will not withhold from any nation the privileges which they demanded for themselves when Alaska was part of the Russian Empire, they are not disposed to exercise in the possessions acquired from Russia any less power or authority than they were willing to concede to the Imperial Government of Russia when its sovereignty extended over them. He claims from friendly nations a recognition of the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia. With regard to the first of these arguments, namely, that the seizure of the Canadian vessels in the Behring's Sea was justified by the fact that they were | engaged in a pursuit that is in itself contra bonos mores—a pursuit which of necessity involves a serious and permanent injury to the rights of the Government and people of the United States," it is obvious that two questions are involved: first, whether the pursuit and killing of fur- seals in certain parts of the open sea is, from the point of view of international morality, an offence contra bonos mores; and secondly, whether, if such be the case, this fact justifies the seizure on the high seas and subsequent confiscation in time of peace of the- private vessels of a friendly nation. It is an axiom of international maritime law that such action is only admissible- in the case of piracy or in pursuance of special international agreement. This principle has been universally admitted by jurists, and was very distinctly laid down by President Tyler in his Special Message to Congress, dated the 27th February, 1843, when, after acknoAvledging the right to detain and search a vessel on suspicion of piracy, he goes on to say: " With this single exception, no nation has, in time of peace,, any authority to detain the ships of another upon the high seas, on any pretext whatever, outside the territorial jurisdiction." Now, the pursuit of seals in the open sea, under whatever circumstances, has never hitherto been considered as piracy by any civilized State. Nor, even if the United States had gone so far as to make the killing of fur-seals piracy by their Municipal * No. 272. 463 Law, would this have justified them in punishing offences against such Law committed T>y any persons other than their own citizens outside the territorial jurisdiction of the- United States. In the case of the Slave Trade, a practice which the civilized world has agreed to look upon with abhorrence, the right of arresting the vessels of another country is exercised only by special international agreement, and no one Government has been allowed that general control of morals in this respect which Mr. Blaine claims on behalf ■of the United States in regard of seal-hunting. But Her Majesty's Government must question whether this pursuit can of itself be regarded as contra, bonos mores, unless and until, for special reasons, it has been agreed by international arrangement to forbid it. Fur-seals are indisputably animals Jer<s nature, and these have universally been regarded by jurists as res nullius until they are caught; ho person, therefore, can have property in them until he has actually reduced them into possession by capture. It requires something more than a mere declaration that the Government or citizens of the United States, or even other countries interested in the seal trade, are losers by a certain course of proceeding, to render that course an immoral one. Her Majesty's Government would deeply regret that the pursuit of fur-seals on the high seas by British vessels should involve even the slightest injury to the people of the United States. If the case be proved, they will be ready to consider what measures ■can be properly taken for the remedy of such injury, but they would be unable on that ground to depart from a principle on which free commerce on the high seas •depends. The second argument advanced by Mr. Blaine is that the "fur-seal fisheries of Behring's Sea had been exclusively controlled by the Government of Russia, without interference and without question, from their original discovery until the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867," and that "from 1867 to 1886 the possession, •in which Russia had been undisturbed, was enjoyed by the United States' Government also without interruption or intrusion from any source." I will deal with these two periods separately. First, as to the alleged exclusive monopoly of Russia. After Russia, at the instance of the Russian American Fur Company, claimed in 1821 the pursuits of "Commerce, whaling, and fishing from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude, and not only prohibited all foreign vessels from landing on tbe coasts and islands of the above waters, but also prevented them from approaching within 100 miles •■thereof, Mr. Quincy Adams wrote as follows to the United States' Minister in Russia:— "The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times throughout *the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions." That the right of fishing thus asserted included the right of killing fur-bearing animals is shown by the case of the United States' brig "Loriot." That vessel proceeded to the waters over which Russia claimed exclusive jurisdiction for the purpose of hunting the sea-otter, the killing of which is now prohibited by the United States' Statutes applicable to the fur-seal, and was forced to abandon her voyage and leave the waters in question by an armed vessel of the Russian navy. Mr. Forsyth, writing on the case to the American Minister at St. Petersburgh on the 4th May, 1837, -said:— "It is a violation of the rights of the citizens of the United States, immemorially ^exercised and secured to them as well by the law of nations as by the stipidations of the 1st Article of the Convention of 1824, to fish in those seas, aud to resort to the coast for the prosecution of their lawful commerce upon points not already occupied." From the speech of Mr. Sumner when introducing the question of the purchase of Alaska to Congress, it is equally clear that the United States' Government did not ^regard themselves as purchasing, a monopoly. Having dealt with fur-bearing animals, he went on to treat of fisheries, and, after alluding to the presence of different species of whales in the vicinity of the Aleutians, said: "iNro sea is now marc clausum; all of these may be pursued by a ship under any flag, except directly on the coast or within :its territorial limit." I now come to the statement that from 1867 to 18S6 the possession was enjoyed by the United States with no interruption and no intrusion from any source. Her Majesty's Government cannot but think that Mr. Blaine has been misinformed as to ;the history of the operations in Behring's Sea during that period. The instances recorded in Inclosure 1 in this despatch are sufficient, to prove, from 464 Si official United States' sources, that from 1867 to 1886 British vessels were engaged at intervals in the fur-seal fisheries, with the cognizance of the United States' Government. I will here, by way of example, quote but one. In 1872 Collector Phelps reported the fitting-out of expeditions in Australia and Victoria for the purpose of taking seals in Behring's Sea, while passing to and from their rookeries on St. Paul and St. George Islands, and recommended that a steam- cutter should be sent to the region of Ounimak Pass and the Islands of St. Paul and St. George. Mi*. Secretary Boutwell informed him, in reply, that he did not consider it expedient to send a cutter to interfere with the operations of foreigners, and stated, " In addition, I do not see that the United States would have the jurisdiction or power to drive off parties going up there for that purpose, unless they made such attempt within a marine league of the shore." Before leaving this part of Mr. Blaine's argument, I would allude to his remark, that " vessels from other nations passing from time to time through Behring's Sea to the Arctic Ocean in pursuit of whales have always abstained from taking part in the capture of seals," which he holds to be proof of the recognition of rights held and exercised first by Russia and then by the United States. Even if the facts are as stated, it is not remarkable that vessels pushing on for the short season in which whales can be captured in the Arctic Ocean, and being fitted specially for the whale fisheries, neglected to carry boats and hunters for fur-seals, or to engage in an entirely different pursuit. The whalers, moreover, pass through Behring's Sea to the fishing-grounds in the Arctic Ocean in April and May as soon as the ice breaks up, while the great bulk of the seals do not reach the Pribyloff Islands till June, leaving again by the time the closing- up of the ice compels the whalers to return. The statement that it is " a fact now held beyond denial or doubt that the taking of seals in the open sea rapidly leads to their extinction" would admit of reply, and abundant evidence could be adduced on the other side. But as it is proposed that this part of the question should be examined by a Committee to be appointed by the two Governments, it is not necessary that I should deal with it here. Her Majesty's Government do not deny that if all sealing were stopped in Behring's Sea except on the islands in possession of the lessees of the United States, the seal may increase and multiply at an even more extraordinary rate than at present, and the seal fishery on the islands may become a monopoly of increasing value; but they cannot admit that this is a sufficient ground to justify the United States in forcibly depriving other nations of any share in this industry in waters which, by the recognized law of nations, are now free to all the world. It is from no disrespect that I refrain from replying specifically to the subsidiary questions and arguments put forward by Mr. Blaine. Till the views of the two Governments as to the obligations attaching, on grounds either of morality or necessity, to the United States' Government in this matter, have been brought into closer harmony, such a course would appear needlessly to extend a controversy which Her Majesty's Government are anxious to keep within reasonable limits. The negotiations now being carried on at Washington prove the readiness of Her Majesty's Government to consider whether any special international agreement is necessary for the protection of the fur-sealing industry. In its absence they are unable to admit that the case put forward on behalf of the United States affords any sufficient justification for the forcible action already taken by them against peaceable subjects of Her Majesty engaged in lawful operations on the high seas. " The President," says Mr. Blaine, " is persuaded that all friendly nations will concede to the United States the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia." Her Majesty's Government have no difficulty in making such a concession. In strict accord with the views which, previous to the present controversy, were consistently iind successfully maintained by the United States, they have, whenever occasion arose, opposed all claims to exclusive privileges in the non-territorial waters of Behring's Sea. The rights they have demanded have been those of free navigation and fishing in liters which, previous to their own acquisition of Alaska, the United States declared to be free and open to all foreign vessels. That is the extent of their present contention, and they trust .that, on consideration of the arguments now presented to them, the United States will recognize its justice and moderation. 465 I have to request that you will read this despatch to Mr. Blaine, and leave a copy of it with him should he desire it. I am, &e. (Signed) SALISBURY. Inclosure in No. 336. Memorandu m. IN 1870, Collector Phelps reported, "The barque ' Cyane' has arrived at this port (San Francisco) from Alaska, having on board forty-seven seal-skins." (See Ex. Doc. No. 83, 44th Congress, 1st Session.) In 1872, he reported expeditions fitting out in Australia and Victoria for the purpose of taking seals in Behring's Sea, and was informed that it was not expedient to interfere with them. In 1874, Acting Secretary Sawyer, writing to Mr. Elliott, Special Agent, said:— I It having been officially reported to this Department by the Collector of Customs at Port Townsend, from Neea-ah Bay, that British vessels from Victoria cross over into American waters and engage in taking fur-seals (which, he represents, are annually becoming more numerous on our immediate coast) to the great injury of our sealers, both white and Indian, you wiU give such proper attention to the examination of the subject as its importance may seem to you, after careful inquiry, to demand, and with a view to a Report to the Department of all facts ascertained." (Ditto, May 4th, No. 117, p. 114.) In 1875, Mr. Mclntyre, Treasury Agent, described how | before proceeding to harsh measures" he had warned the Captain of the " Cygnet," who was shooting seals in Zapadnee Bay, and stated that the Captain appeared astonished that he was breaking the law. (Ditto, March 15th, 1875, No. 130, p. 124.) In 1880, the fur-seal trade of the British Columbia coast was of great importance. Seven vessels were then engaged in the fishery, of which the greater number were, in 1886 and 1887, seized by the United States' Government in Behring's Sea. In 1884, Daniel and Alexander McLean, both British subjects, took the American schooner " San Diego " to Behring's Sea, and were so successful that they returned there in 1885, from Victoria, With the "Mary Ellen" and the " Favourite." No. 337. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 23.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, May 22, 1890. A STATEMENT appears in the newspapers to-day that after a Cabinet Council, held on Tuesday, it has been decided to reject the British counter-proposal, and instructions have been issued to the officer commanding the United States' Revenue cruizer " Bear," now lying at Seattle, similar to those of last year, with one exception, viz., that, instead of capturing, she is to dismantle all vessels found sealing in Behring's Sea, and to seize their log-books and skins as evidence in case of judicial proceedings being, taken. I went at once to Mr. Blaine, who did not deny these statements. I remonstrated against the publication of such news before he had returned any reply to the proposals of Her Majesty's Government, and against the issue of such instructions while negotiations are pending. In reply, he said that the press could not be controlled • that his answer was delayed in order to return a joint reply with Russia; that our draft Convention was quite inadequate to the necessities of the case. He inveighed against the words of Article VI, which purports to prescribe regulations on land, and urged that, as there would be no seals without the seal islands, the possession of those islands gave the United States special rights on the open sea, in order to enable them to protect the species. The United States' Government would never admit that, as regards the seal fishery, the rights of Great Britain in Behring's Sea were equal to their own. Nothing short of the total exclusion of sealing-vessels during the summer months, in which we proposed to leave the fisheries open, would satisfy them. I strongly insisted that the sole ground of discussion was the preservation of the ■ [128J 3 O 466 seals, reminding him of his assurance at our last interview that the draft offered a basis of negotiation. \ih>Mrt ^Vj He replied that on that occasion he had in his mind the question of arbitration, but he did not think we would ever agree as to the form of questions to be submitted to arbitration. I will not cease to press Mr. Blaine that our proposals may receive a formal reply. No. 338. Extract from the "Morning Ppst" of May 23, 1890. The Behring's Sea Fisheries. [Reuter's Telegram.] New )?ork, May 21. THE United States' Revenue cutter "Bear" has been ordered to cruize in the Behring's Sea for the protection of the seal fisheries, with instructions to seize and dismantle all vessels found violating the Statute, in order to deprive them of the means of its further violation. The vessel is also ordered to seize the logs and skins on board vessels found illegally fishing, and to preserve them as evidence against the offending persons. No. 339. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office^ May 23, 1890. THIS morning's newspapers contain a paragraph which states, in substance, that the United States' Government have instructed some of their ships of war to proceed to Behring's Sea, with orders to take such steps as may be necessary to prevent the merchant-vessels of other nations from pursuing their calling as fur-sealers in non- territorial waters. The communications made to you by Mr. Secretary Blaine, as recorded in your instant, give a general confirmation of the statements of the telegram of the 22nd press. I have to instruct you to inform the Secretary of State that a formal protest against any such interference with British vessels is now being prepared, and that no time will be lost in forwarding it to him. No. 340. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury. [Received May 23.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, May 28, 1890.. lip*. WITH reference to your Lordship's telegram ol to-day's date, I have addressed a note to Mr. Blaine, as instructed by your Lordship. No. 341. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, May 24, 1890. YOU will receive by this mail my despatch of the 22nd instenj^ replying to the arguments urged by Mr. Blaine in his note of the 22nd January last in defence of the seizure of Canadian vessels by United States' Revenue cruizers in Behring's Sea. Those arguments were not such as Her Majesty's Government could admit to be valid according to the established principles of international law, or sufficient to justify the acts complained of. The reply has been for some time in draft; but Her Majesty's Government were unwilling to introduce any unnecessary element of controversy into the negotiations in which you are engaged for the friendly settlement of the whole 467 question. I had, therefore, thought that a certain delay in the presentation of the despatch would hot'be disadvantageous. I The intelligence contained frryour telegrams of the 22nd instant as to the dispatch of United States' cruizers to Behring's Sea, and the instructions with which they are provided, render it necessary that the communication should no longer be delayed. I have accordingly to request that you will at once place a copy of it in Mr. Blaine's nands. I shall forward to you, as soon as its terms have been approved by the Queen and the Cabinet, "&<■ formal Protest, to be delivered to' Mr. Blaine, against any such Interferem?e with British'vessels outside the1! territorial waters of the United States, as appears to b$'contemplated in the instructions just issued. I need not say that it mjuld. pe a cause of sincelfe satisfaction to Her Majesty's Government if a consideration of lihe arguments advanced iS'ihy despatch, and of those with which you will be able to supplement them, should induce the Government of the United States so to limit the action of their cruizers as to remove the occasion for such a Protest. I am, &o. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 342. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, May 29, 1890. I RECEIVED on the 23rd instant, and at once submitted to the Queen and the Cabinet, your telegrams of the previous day, reporting the instructions- issued to the United States' Revenue cruizers in Behring's Sea for the approaching fishery season. According to accounts given in the press, the accuracy of which is not denied by Mr. Blaine,' these instructions are similar to those under which Canadian vessels were seized last summer outside the territorial waters of the United States, with this exception, thaf, instead of capturing vessels found sealing in Behring's Sea', the Gruizers are'to dismantle 'such vessels, and to seize their losr-books' and skins as ©vidence m case of judicial proceedings. This modification, it is unnecessary to say, in no way removes the objections of Her Majesty's Government to "such interference with British vessels on thJehigh seas as contrary to international law and the practice of civilized, nations. They deeply regret this decision' of the United States' Government, as likely, if persisted in, to produce the most, serious complications, and to frustrate' 'th'e efforts now being made to arrive at an agreement for the proper protection oi the seal fisheries, and the settlement of tbe questions connected therewith. Her Majesty's Government have no alternative, under the circumstances, but to. protest formally and solemnly against any interference on the part of United States' cruizers with British vessels navigating outside the territorial jurisdiction' of the United States, and to leave to' the United States' Government the responsibilit¥ of the -consequences if that protest is disregarded. I accordingly inclose herewith the draft of a note which you will address to Mr. Blaine if you should unfortunately find that there is no intention of so modiflyinfi or restricting the action of the United States' cruizers as to render this step unnecessary. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. Inclosure in No. 342. Draft of Note to be addressed to Mr. Blaine. THE Undersigned, Her Britannic Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, &c, has the honour, by instructions of his Government, to make to Mr. Blaine, Secretary of State, &c, the foUowing communication: Her Britannic Majesty's Government have learned with great concern, from notices which have appeared in the press, and the general accuracy of which has been confirmed by Mr. Blaine's statements to the Undersigned, that the Government of the [128J 3 0 2 Wm\. 468 United States have issued instructions to their Revenue cruizers about to be. dispatched to Behring's Sea, under which the vessels of British subjects will again be exposed, in the prosecution of their legitimate industry on the high seas, to unlawful interference at the hands of American officers. Her Britannic Majesty's Government are anxious to co-operate to the fullest extent of their power with the Government of the United States in such measures as may be found to be expedient for the protection of the seal fisheries. They are at the present moment engaged in examining, in concert with the Government of the United States, the best method of arriving at an agreement upon this point. But they cannot admit the right of the United States of their own sole motion to restrict for this purpose the freedom of navigation of Behring's Sea, which the United States have themselves in former years convincingly and successfully vindicated, nor to enforce their municipal legislation against British vessels on the high seas beyond the limits of their territorial jurisdiction. Her Britannic Majesty's Government are therefore unable to pass over without notice the public announcement of an intention on the part of the Government of the United States to renew the acts of interference with British vessels navigating outside the territorial waters of the United States, of which they have previously had to complain. The Undersigned is in consequence instructed formally to protest against such interference, and to declare that Her Britannic Majesty's Government must hold the Government of the United States responsible for the consequences that may ensue from acts which are contrary to the established principles of international law. The Undersigned has the honour to renew to Mr. Blaine the assurances of his highest consideration. No. 343. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received May 31.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, May 30, 1890. I RECEIVED last night from the Secretary of State a long note, copy of which I have sent by bag to-day, on the question of the negotiations for a close season in the Behring's Sea. The note commences by a protest against the course alleged to be pursued by Her Majesty's Government in " authorizing, encouraging, and protecting" British vessels, who, it maintains, are interfering with the rights of the United States and those of the whole civilized world by taking seals in that sea. The history of the negotiations for a close season from their commencement is reviewed in the note, which then goes on to inveigh strongly against the change of position taken by Her Majesty's Government in the negotiations, which change, the Secretary of State maintains, has been brought about by the | interposition of Canada." Mr. Blaine then points out that the arrangements which were proposed in 188S relative to a close season, and those which were proposed in the draft Convention, must be considered to be " in significant contrast." Moreover, the latter are, in the opinion of the United States' Government, quite inadequate to protect the rights of the United States in the Behring's Sea. They are equally insufficient for the preservation of seal life. The United States and Russia have consequently no other course but to reject our proposals. The negotiations will, however, be continued by the United States' Government in the hope that a satisfactory agreement may be arrived at, although it is too late, the note says, for the application of any result, which may be reached, to this season. Mr. Blaine maintains that the responsibility of the delays which have occurred cannot be laid to the charge of his Government. The note contains at the conclusion a proposal on the part of the United States' Government that with the view of avoiding any interruption of the negotiations by any "untoward events," all British vessels shall be prevented by Her Majesty's Government from entering the Behring's Sea. 469 No. 344. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, May 31, 1890. IN reply to your telegram of the 30th instant, I have to state that it is impossible, on grounds both of law and of policy, for Her Majesty's Government to accept Mr. Blaine's suggestion that British sealing-ships should be forbidden to enter the Behring's Sea. No. 345. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 3.) My Lord, Washington, May 23, 1890. WITH reference to my telegram of yesterday's date, I have the honour to inclose herewith extracts from the " New York Herald | and the | NewYork Evening Post" relative to the instructions given to the Revenue cutter " Bear," and to the report that the Cabinet had decided to reject the Behring's Sea proposal. Your Lordship will observe that in the account of the alleged interview with the correspondent of the "Evenirg Post," the Secretary of the Treasury is reported to have denied ever having seen the British proposal, which throws some doubt upon the statement in the " Herald," that the Cabinet had refused to accept the proposal. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 1 in No. 345. Extract from the "New York Evening Post" of May 22, 1890. The Behring's Sea Question. What Secretary Windom says of a Current Report. [Special Despatch to the " Evening Post."] Washington, May 22, 1890. SECRETARY WINDOM was asked this morning what truth there was in the report telegraphed from here last night, that he had taken a decisive stand in the Cabinet meeting yesterday against the acceptance of the British Behring's Sea proposal. " I have not read the despatch," he answered. " I consequently cannot plead to the indictment." | Did you authorize the statement, then, that you did not oppose the acceptance of the proposal ?" : What is the nature of the proposal said to be ?" he asked, in reply. ■ " That is not given. I No British proposal," he then said, | has been submitted to me. I am here simply to enforce the law, and I am trying to do so. But, naturally, I do not care to discuss the matter till 1 have had a chance to see of what I am accused." The instructions given to the Commander of the Revenue cutter "Bear" respecting the capture of sealing-vessels in Alaskan waters are identical with those of last year, except that captured vessels are to be dismantled, so as to prevent any repetition of the offence during the season. The Commander is to warn all persons against entering Behring's Sea for the purpose of violating the laws of the United States therein, and particularly the law which provides that no person shall kill any fur seal " within the limits of Alaska territory or the waters thereof." What those limits are has not been defined. The British Columbian sealers hold that they are the waters within 3 miles of any land of Alaska territory. Do we hold the contrary? Not so far as any 470 authentic documentary evidence has been submitted. Not so far as either Congress or the President has declared. We have not gone to the length of laying down one rule for Behring's Sea and a different one for the Gulf of St. Lawrence. It would seem, therefore, that the Government has put into the discretion of the Commander of a Revenue cutter a question of extreme gravity which it has not ventured to decide for ffe'ei},'' siid that upori'ftis decision may rest issues of vast importance. Of course, no o^8ussion Of the Behring's Sea question of any value will be possible until the nego- raraon's1 between Secretary Blaine and Sir Julian Pauncefote are made public. Inclosure 2 in No. 345. Extract from the " New York Herald " of May 22, 1890. Great Excitement in Canada. [From our Regular Correspondent.] I Herald " Bureau, corner of Fifteenth and G Streets, N. W., Washington, May 21, 1890. J JjE^-J^ that at the Cabinet meeting yesterday it was decided to reject the British proposition submitted three weeks ago for a settlement of the Behring's Sea question. | Secretary Windom, as I am informed, was decidedly opposed to the acceptance of the proposal—first, because its provisions were deemed by him. entirely inadequate to secure the professed object of preserving seal life in Behring's Sea, and, second, because it virtually ignored the established position of the United States in that sea arising out of its ownership of the partially surrounding shores and of a part of the islands within the sea; the possession of a universally recognized boundary-line which included in the cession to the United States the very'part of the sea wherein alone this country has sought to exercise a territorial jurisdiction; the inheritance from Russia of a continuous claim of jurisdiction never directly questioned nor successfully assailed, and the undoubted right that the United States has to exercise a reasonable police jurisdiction to protect its own property and interests in Behring's Sea, and secure to itself the natural use and profit thereof. Secretary Blaine did not advocate an acceptance of the proposal, and thought it probable that further negotiations would abate the Canadian contention's and improve the position of the United States. The British proposal, being without support from either of the two Departments immediately concerned with it, necessarily met with rejection, a like fate with that which overtook the preceding American proposal in the Couricil of the' Governor-General of Canada. •'■' I undelrsfjand' that in neither case was an acceptance of the proposal anticipated by the party submitting it, but that the only result expected from the exchange of proposals was the bringing of the parties a little nearer together by the elimiaation of some of the points of difference. To some extent, according to my information, this expectation has been realized, so that the negotiations are really in a better state, notwithstanding'the reflection of the counter-proposals than at the beginning. The Next Step. I am advised that the next step in the negotiations will be the discussion and settlement of the details connected with the creation of a Joint Commission of experts to 'prepare and submit to the two Governments a full and particular project as the biksis of a.' Trekty bywhich the whole question can be permanently settled. It is possible that the Government of Russia rday be directly represented in this Commission of '"everts, but that is "a matter which has not yet received any consideration, and is* attc%ethet'likely to be governed by the wishes of that Government at the proper time! ' In any and all events, there is a confident expectation that a Treaty can be framed in titne for Submission to the Senate immediately 'upon the Opening of the second Session of the present Congress. 471 Enforcing a Closure. _ The more important question for the Cabinet yesterday was that of the ad interim policy to be pursued in Behring's Sea with immediate reference to the sealing season, which, will be ,in full headway by the end of this month. The Treasury view <was .that, inasmuch as tin? British Government had admitted a close .season to be.necessary to the Reservation of the seals and the just interest of the United States, and hadoffered-ias part of its proposal a radius around the seal islands to protect the. female seals fican attacks while obtaining food in the waters adjacent to the Booker^ Islands, it wouldi)© admissible and proper to enforce by warning, and by reatetinfL after yarning., had proved ineffectual in any case, such a closure during, the present season, relying npon the good sense and disposition of the British Government to acquiesce in' measures so entirely reasonable and merely provisional. . | i^$ This view prevailed, it being a practical and substantial acceptance.oBjthe,.,»no(/w$ yivendi voluntarily tendered by the British Government in company with, iisorejected proposal. The Commanders of the cruizing vessels will be emphatically enjoined to refrain, so far as possible within the lines of their instructions,, from any,conduct toward the British sealers whom they meet with that can be made the occasion of just complaint or resentment. ,r)i CKi'?■'&&'% 'i:,jii These instructions will be communicated to the British .Government iniOEderithat the Canadian authorities may take any action they may deem advisable towaxd the common end of maintaining peace and amity from now till the close of the season. Orders to the " Bear " to proceed to Behring's Sea and seize all Vessels engaged in Unlawful Acts. Washington, May 2l, i890. Secretary Windom to-day signed the Sailing Orders of the Revenue-cutter " Bear," now at Seattle, Washington, directing that she sail immediately to Ounalaska and then to cruize diligently in Behring's Sea for the purpose of warning all persons against entering such waters for the purpose of violating section 1956 of the Revised Statutes, and arresting all persons and seizing all vessels found to be or to have been engaged in any violation of the laws of the United States therein. '^litMl§l(tli Section 1956, Revised Statutes, referred to above, provides that " no jierson shall Sill any otter, mink, marten, sable, or fur seal, or other fur-bearing animal within, the limits of Alaska territory or in the waters thereof, and every person guilty thereof shall, for each offence, be fined not less than 200 dollars, nor more than .1,00(3 dollars? or imprisoned not more than six months, or both, and all vessels, their tackle, jySbarei, furniture, and cargo found engaged in violation of this section shall be forfeited, but the Secretary of the Treasury shall have power to authorize the killing of any such otter, mink, marten, sable, or other fur-bearing animal. except fur seals, upder such Regulations as he may prescribe, and it shall be the duty of the Secretary io.§$&f§8.i the killing of any fur seal, and to provide for the execution of the provisions of' tins section until it is otherwise provided by law, nor shall he grant any special privileges under this section." •';... .The Commander of the " Bear " is aiso furnished with copies of the PresideWf last Proclamation on this subject and the Act of the 2nd March, 1§89, regarding* tire seal and salmon fisheries of Alaska. Dismantling the Law Breakers. The instructions, while not differing materiaUy from those of last year, are mtie![ more specific in character. Efforts will be made to avoid a repetition of last year's experience with foreign vessels seized for violations of law. In two or three cases the vessels were placed in charge of a prize crew consisting of one man, and, as a result, nevei" reached the port where he was ordered to take them. While it will be equally impossible now to increase the size of the prize crews, an effort will be made to accomplish the same result in another way. According to the present instructions, it is understood that all vessels found violating the law will be dismantled and deprived of all means of further violations. Their logs and all skins are also to be seized and preserved as evidence against them. With the exception of certain details as to the enforcement of the law there is, however, no change in the general policy of the administration on this question. 472 No. 346. Ii! IP iii- ,;-: ■■■' iiii IPtf ■■..• * Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 3.) My Lord, Washington, May 23, 1890. IMMEDIATELY upon reading in the newspapers of yesterday the announcement (which I at once telegraphed to your Lordship) that the United States' Cabinet had decided to reject the counter-proposal of Her Majesty's Government for the settlement of the Behring's Sea question, and that they had issued orders to their Revenue cruizers to prevent all vessels from engaging in the sealing-industry in those waters, I called on the Secretary of State and in quired whether the announcement was correct. Mr. Blaine did not deny its accuracy, and defended the action of the Treasury in regard to their instructions to the Revenue cruizers, which he said were issued pursuant to an Act of Congress. I objected that no Act of Congress authorized interference with foreign vessels on the high seas. It was a misconstruction of the Act so to apply its provisions. I remonstrated against the publication in the press of the decision of his Government on the proposals of Her Majesty's Government before any reply had been returned to those proposals, and I complained of the issue of the orders reported to have been given to the Revenue cruizers while the negotiations were still pending, contrary to the assurance given by him in his note to me of the 24th March last. Mr. Blaine replied to the effect that it was not possible to guard against the publication in the press of news of such public interest; that his answer to the British proposals, which he had promised to send to me last week, had been delayed, as he now proposed that it should be in the form of a joint reply from his Government and that of Russia; and that, as regards the orders to the Revenue cruizers, they were the natural consequence of the rejection of the proposals which I had submitted to the Conference. Those proposals he proceeded to criticize as totally inadequate to the necessities of the case, and he animadverted upon the words in Article VI of the draft Convention, which purport to prescribe Regulations on land. I pointed out to him that the draft Convention afforded the most ample protection to seal life by prohibiting pelagic sealing during the periods of migration to and from the Rookeries, and by establishing a radius around the Seal Islands to prevent the surreptitious landing of marauders. Moreover, it supplied the most complete machinery for arriving at a final decision as to what regulations should be adopted for the preservation of the seal species. Mr. Blaine then urged that the United States, by the possession of the Seal Islands, had acquired special rights in Behring's Sea as regards the seal fishery. He said that the United States' Government could never admit that Great Britain had rights equal to their own in that sea, and that they would not be satisfied with anything less than the total exclusion of all sealing vessels from Behring's Sea during the summer months in which Her Majesty's Government proposed that the fishery should be open I reminded Mr. Blaine that the sole question was the preservation of the seal species. I urged that the draft Convention made ample provision for that purpose. That as regarded the. claim which he advocated on behalf of his Government to special rights beyond the territorial waters of Behring's Sea, it rested on novel doctrines entirely opposed to the law and practice of nations. I also reminded him that he had quite recently informed me that the draft Convention, though not acceptable to his Government in its present form, afforded a basis of settlement. Mr. Biaine replied that he had at that time in bis mind the provision relating to arbitration; but he doubted whether the two Governments could ever come to terms as to the form of the questions to be submitted for decision. My interview here came to an end, Mr. Blaine having an appointment with the President which compelled him to leave for the White House. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. - No. 347. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received «7i une My Lord, Washington, May 23, 1890. IN compliance with the instructions contained in your Lordship's telegram of to-day, I have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I have addressed to 473 Mr. Blaine, in which I have informed him that a formal protest by Her Majesty's Government against any interference with British vessels in Behring's Sea will be forwarded to him without delay. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 347. Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Sir, Washington, May 23, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inform you that a statement having appeared in the newspapers, to the effect that United States' Revenue cruizers have received orders to proceed to Behring's Sea for the purpose of preventing the exercise of the seal- fishery by foreign vessels in non-territorial waters, and that statement having been confirmed yesterday by you, I am instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state to you that a formal protest, by Her Majesty's Government, against any such interference with British vessels, will be forwarded, to you without delay.' I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 348. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic ) Foreign Office, June 3, 1890. INFORMATION has reached Her Majesty's Government that about twenty-three British vessels have already cleared from ports in British North America for the seal fishing. All question, therefore, of stopping them, even if Her Majesty's Government considered it expedient to do so, is at an end. No. 349. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 7.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, June 7, 1890. MR. BLAINE having inquired, on behalf of the President, whether with a view to a friendly settlement by arbitration Her Majesty's Government would consent to the total exclusion of British sealers for the present season from Behring's Sea, I replied at once that this proposal could not be entertained, as apart from other considerations which I explained there was no legal power to enforce such exclusion. My answer has elicited a long note expressing the President's regret that his most friendly and considerate proposal for adjusting all troubles connected with the Behring's Sea question should be rejected so promptly. With reference to a statement made by me to the effect that the further examination of the question had satisfied Her Majesty's Government that total exclusion went beyond the requirements of the case, the note states that until the receipt of my reply the United States' Government had never been informed that any other objection to the proposal was entertained by your Lordship than that assigned by you when you abruptly closed the negotiations in London, viz., that Canada would not consent to it. It observes any privileges conferred on Canadian sealers must be extended at once to American vessels, and that our proposed radius of 10 miles would expose female seals to be slaughtered by hundreds of thousands. "The President does not conceal his disappointment that even for the sake of securing arbitration, Her Majesty's Government refuses to suspend for a single season the practice which your Lordship described in 1888 as the wanton destruction of a valuable industry, and which the United States' Government has uniformly regarded as an unprovoked invasion of its established rights." I have declined in my acknowledgment of the note to continue the correspondence until I receive further instructions, especially as the views of Her Majesty's Govern- [128] mmm 3 p 474 ment are clearly explained in your Lordship's despatch of the 22nd ultimo, which I read to the Secretary of State only a few hours before his note reached me. m No. 350. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 7.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, June 7, 1890. MR. BLAINE has postponed our interview arranged^ for this morning. I will endeavour to meet him in the course of to-morrow. II IB life' i. ■. • No. 351. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, June 7, 1890. I REGRET to learn from your telegram of the 7th instant that the President should think I am wanting in conciliation in the Behring's Sea negotiations. I think, however, that he misunderstands the conditions of our law. There is no power whatever which would enable Her Majesty's Government to exclude British or Canadian vessels from any part of the high seas for however short a period of time without first obtaining, in the one case, an Act of the British Parliament, and in the other one, of the Canadian Parliament. We have always been willing, without pledging ourselves to details as to area and date, to negotiate with the hope of coming to an arrangement for the establishment of a close season so far as necessary to preserve the fur-seal species, but its provisions would require the sanction of the respective Legislatures. I do not recognize the expressions which are apparently attributed to me in Mr. Blaine'3 note. I do not think I used them, not at all events in the context stated in the note. No. 352. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 9.) My Lord, Washington, May 29, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 23rd instant, I have the honour to inclose copy of a note which I have received from Mr. Blaine in reply to my communication of the 23rd instant, in which I informed him that a formal protest by Her Majesty's Government against any interference with British vessels in Behring's Sea would be forwarded to him without delay. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 352. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Department of State, May 26, 1890. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your note of the 23rd instant, in which you inform me that Her Britannic Majesty's Government will formally protest against certain action recently taken by this Government for the protection of the Alaska seal fisheries. L have &c. (Signed) ' J. G. BLAINE. 475 No. 353. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 9.) My Lord, Washington, May 30, 1890. WITH reference to my telegram of to-day's date, I have the honour to inclose copy of the note which I have received from Mr. Blaine, informing me of the rejection of the draft Convention by bis Government and that of Russia, and stating the grounds for that decision. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 353. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Department of State, May 29, 1890. YOUR note of the 23rd instant, already acknowledged, informs this Government that you "have been instructed by the Marquis of Salisbury to state that Her Majesty's Government would forward, without delay, a protest" against the course which this Government has found it necessary, under the laws of Congress, to pursue in the waters of the Behring's Sea. In turn, I am instructed by the President to protest against the course of the British Government in authorizing, encouraging, and protecting vessels which are not only interfering with American rights in the Behring's Sea, but which are doing violence as well to the rights of the civilized world. They are engaged in a warfare against seal life, disregarding all the Regulations which lead to its protection, and committing acts which lead ultimately to its destruction, as has been the case in every part of the world where the abuses which are now claimed as British rights have been practised. The President is surprised that such protest should be authorized by Lord Salisbury, especially because the previous declarations of his Lordship would seem to render it impossible. On the 11th November, 1887, Lord Salisbury, in an official interview with the Minister from the United States (Mr. Phelps), cordially agreed that I a Code of Regulations should be adopted for the preservation of the seals in Behring's Sea from destruction at improper times, by improper means, by the citizens of either country." And Lord Salisbury suggested that Mr. Phelps " should obtain from his Government, and submit to him (Lord Salisbury), a sketch of a system of Regulations which would be adequate for the purpose." Further interviews were held during ti¥e following month of February (1888) between Lord Salisbury and the American Minister, and between Lord Salisbury and the American Minister, accompanied by the Russian Ambassador. In answer to Lord Salisbury's request, Mr. Phelps submitted the I Regulations " which the Government of the United States desired;' and in a despatch of the 25th February Mi. Phelps communicated the following to Mr. Bayard, Secretary of State :— " Lord Salisbury assents to your proposition to establish, by mutual arrangement between the Governments interested, a close time for fur-seals, between the 15th April and the 1st November and between 160° of longitude west and 170° of longitude east, in the Behring's Sea. And he will cause an Act to be introduced into Parliament to give effect to this arrangement so soon as it can be prepared. In his opinion, there is no doubt that the Act will be passed. " He will also join the United States' Government in any preventive measures it may be thought best to adopt, by orders issued to the naval vessels of the respective Governments in that region." Early in April (1888) the Russian Ambassador in London, M. de Staal, advised the American Charge" "that the Russian Government would like to have the Regulations which might be agreed upon for the Behring's Sea extended to that portion of the latter in which the Commander Islands are situated, and also to the Sea of Okhotsk, in which Robben Island is situated." On the 16th April, at Lord Salisbury's invitation, the Russian Ambassador and Mr. White (the American Charge), Mr. Phelps being absent from London, met at the Foreign Office " for the purpose of discussing with Lord Salisbury tbe details of the proposed Conventional arrangement for the protection of seals in Behring's Sea." ****** [1281 3 P 2 476 HlKpii ;k nil 111 I With a view to meeting the Russian Government's wishes respecting the waters surrounding Robben Island, his Lordship suggested that beside the whole of Behring's Sea, those portions of the Sea of Okhotsk and of the Pacific Ocean north of north latitude 47° should be included in the proposed arrangement. His Lordship intimated, furthermore, that the period proposed by the United States for a closed time, from the 15th April to the 1st November, might interfere with the trade longer than absolutely necessary for the protection of seals, and he suggested the 1st October, instead of a month later, as the termination of the period of seai protection." Furthermore, Lord Salisbury " promised to have a draft Convention prepared for submission to the Russian Ambassador and the American Minister." On the 23rd April, the American Charge" was informed by Lord Salisbury that " it is now proposed to give effect to a Seal Convention by Order in Council, not by Act of Parliament." It was understood that this course was proposed by Lord Salisbury in order that the | Regulations" needed in Behring's Sea might be promptly applied. You will observe, then, that from the 11th November, 1887, to the 23rd April, 1888, Lord Salisbury had in every form of speech assented to the necessity of a close season for the protection of the seals. The shortest period which he named was from the 15th April to the 1st October— five and a-half months. In addition, his Lordship suggested that the closed sea for the period named should include the whole of the Behring's Sea, and should also include such portion of the Sea of Okhotsk as would be necessary to protect the Russian seal fishery on Robben Island; that the closed season be extended as far south as 47° north latitude, 120 miles south of the northern boundary of the United States on the Pacific Ocean. He promised, further, to draft a Convention upon the subject between England, Russia, and the United States. These assurances were given to the American Minister, to the American Charge", to the Russian. Ambassador, and on more than one occasion to two of them together. The United States had no reason, therefore, to doubt that the whole dispute touching the seal fisheries was practicaUy settled. Indeed, to have distrusted it would have been to question the good faith of Lord Salisbury. In diplomatic intercourse between Great Britain and the United* States, be it said to the honour of both Governments, a verbal assurance from a Minister has always been equal to his written pledge. Speaking the same language, there has been no room for misunderstanding between the Representatives of the two Governments, as may easily happen between those of different tongues. For a period of six months, therefore, without retraction or qualification, without the suggestion of a doubt or the dropping of a hint, the understanding between the two Governments, on the assurance of Lord Salisbury, was as complete as language could make it. On the 28th April, five days after Lord Salisbury's last pointed assurance, five days after he had proposed to perfect the scheme, not by the delay of Parliament, but by the promptness of an Order in Council, the American Charge was informed that the Act of Parliament would be necessary in addition to the Order in Council, and that neither Act nor Order could be drafted I until Canada is heard from." For several weeks following the 28th April, there were many calls by the American Charge at the Foreign Office to learn whether " Canada had been heard from." He called alone, and called in company with the Russian Ambassador. Finally, on the 20th June, Lord Salisbury told him that an urgent telegram had been I sent to Canada a week ago with respect to the delay in its expedition," and that a reply had been " received by the Secretary of State for the Colonies, saying that the matter will.be taken up immediately." Mr. White, relying entirely upon these assurances, ventured to " hope that shortly after Mr. Phelps' return the British Government will be in a condition to agree upon the terms of the proposed Convention." Mr. Phelps returned to London on the 22nd June, two days after Mr. White's interview with Lord Salisbury, and immediately after the urgent telegram had been sent to Canada. On the 28th July, Mr. Phelps had received no assurances from Lord Salisbury, and telegraphed the Department of State his " fear that owing to Canadian opposition we shall get no Convention." In a despatch to his Government of the 12th September he related having had interviews with Lord Salisbury respecting the Convention, which he says had been " virtually agreed upon except in its details." Mr. Phelps goes on to say: " The consideration of it has been suspended for communication by the British Government with the Canadian Government, for which purpose an interval of several months had been allowed to elapse. During this long interval the attention 477 of Lord Salisbury had been repeatedly called to the subject by the American Legation, and on those occasions the answer received from him was that no reply from the Canadian authorities had arrived!" Mr. Phelps proceeds in the despatch of the 12th September to say: " I again pressed Lord Salisbury for the completion of the Convention, as the extermination of seals by Canadian vessels was understood to be rapidly proceeding. His Lordship, in reply, did not question the propriety or the importance of taking measures to prevent the wanton destruction of so valuable an industry, in which, as he remarked, England had a large interest of its own, but his Lordship stated that the Canadian Government objected to any such restrictions, and that until its conseut could be obtained Her Majesty's Government was not willing to enter into the Convention." It was thus finally acknowledged that the negotiation into which Lord Salisbury had cordially entered, and to which he had readily agreed, even himself suggesting some of its most valuable details, was entirely subordinated to the judgment and desire of the Canadian Government. This Government cannot but feel that Lord Salisbury would have dealt more frankly if in the beginning he had informed Minister Phelps that no arrangement could be made unless Canada concurred in it, and that all negotiation with the British Government direct was but a loss of time. When you,.Mr. Minister, arrived in this country a year ago, there seemed the best prospect for a settlement of this question, but the Russian Minister and the American Secretary of State have had the experience of Mr. Phelps and the Russian Ambassador in London repeated. In our early interviews, there seemed to be as ready a disposition on your part to come to a reasonable and friendly adjustment as there certainly has always been on our part to offer one. You will not forget an interview between yourself, the Russian Minister, and myself, in which the lines for a close season in the Behring's Sea laid down by Lord Salisbury were almost exactly repeated by yourself, and were inscribed on Maps which were before us, a copy of which is in the possession of the Russian Minister, and a copy also in my possession. A prompt adjustment seemed practicable, an adjustment which I am sure would have been honourable to all the countries interested. No obstacles were presented on the American side, of the question. No insistance was made upon the Behring's Sea as mare clausum; no objection was interposed to the entrance of British ships at all times, on all commercial errands, through all tbe waters of the Behring's Sea. But our negotiations, as in London, were suddenly broken off for many weeks by the interposition of Canada. When correspondence was resumed on the last day of April, you made an offer for a Mixed Commission of Experts to decide the questions at issue. Your proposition is that pelagic sealing should be prohibited in the Behring's Sea during the months of May, June, October, November, and December, and that there should be no prohibition during the months of July, August, and September. Your proposition involved the condition that British vessels should be allowed to kill seals within 10 miles of the coast of the Pribylov Islands. Lord Salisbury's proposition of 1888 was that, during the same months for which the 10-mile privilege is now demanded, no British vessel hunting seals should come nearer to the Pribylov Islands than the 47th parallel of north latitude about 600 miles. The open season which you thus select for killing is the one when the areas around the breeding islands are most crowded with seals, and especially crowded wit). female seals, going forth to secure food for the hundreds of thousands of their young, of which they have recently been delivered. The destruction of the females, which, according to expert testimony, would be 95 per cent, of all which the sealing vessels might readily capture, would inflict deadly loss upon the rookeries. The destruction of the female would be followed by the destruction of their young on the islands, and the herds would be diminished the next year by this wholesale slaughter of the producing females and their offspring. The 10-mile limit would give the marauders the vantage ground for killing the seals that are in the water by tens searching for food. ne opportunity, uuder cover of fog and night, of thousands, for stealing silently upon the islands and slaughtering the seals within a mile or even less of the keepers' residence, would largely increase the aggregate destruction. Under such conditions, the British vessels could evenly divide with the United States within the 3-mile limit of its own shores, and upon the islands themselves, the whole advantage of the seal fisheries. The respect which the sealing vessels would pay to the 10-mile limit would be the same that wolves pay to a flock of sheep so placed that no shepherd can guard them. This arrangement, according to your proposal, was to continue for three months of each year, the best months in the season for depredations upon the 478 seal herd. No course was left to the United States or to Russia but to reject the proposition. The propositions made by Lord Salisbury in 1888, and the propositions made by Her Majesty's Minister in Washington in 1890, are in significant contrast. The circumstances are the same, the conditions are the same, the rights of the United States are the same, in both years. The position of England has changed, because the wishes of Canada have demanded the change. The result then with which the United States is expected to be content is, that her rights within the Behring's Sea and on the islands thereof are not absolute, but are to be determined by one of Her Majesty's provinces. The British Government would assuredly and rightfully complain if an agreement between her \sic] Representative and the Representative of the United States should, without notice, be broken off by the United States, on the ground that the State of California was not willing that it should be completed. California has a Governor chosen independently of the Executive power of the National Government. Canada has a Governor appointed by the British Crown. The Legislature of California enacts laws with which the Executive power of the United States has no right whatever to interfere; Canada enacts laws with which the Executive power of Great Britain can interfere so far as absolutely to annul. Can the Government of the United States be expected to accept as final a decision of the Government of Great Britain that an agreement with the United States cannot be fulfilled because the Province of Canada objects! This review of the circumstances which led to the present troubles on the Behring's Sea question has been presented by direction of the President, in order to show that the responsibility does not rest with this Government. The change of policy made by Her Majesty's Government without notice, and against the wish of this Government, is, in the President's belief, the cause of all the differences that have followed. I am further instructed by the President to say, that while your proposals of the 30th April cannot be accepted, the United States will continue the negotiation in hope of reaching an agreement that may conduce to a good understanding, and leave no cause for future dispute. In the President's opinion, owing to delays for which this Government is not responsible, it is too late to conclude such negotiation in time to apply its result the present season. He, therefore, proposes that Her Majesty's Government agree not to permit the vessels (which, in his judgment, do injury to the property of the United States) to enter the Behring's Sea for this season, in order that time may be. secured for negotiation that shall not be disturbed by untoward events, or -unduly influenced by popular agitation. If this offer be accepted, the President believes that before another season shall open the friendly relations existing between the two countries, and the mutual desire to continue them, will lead to Treaty stipulations which shaU be permanent, because just and honourable to all parties. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE." No. 354. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 11.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, June 10, 1890: I AS reported in my telegram of the 7th instant, my interview with Mr. Blaine arranged for that day was postponed, and, not having received any further communication from him, I called at his house yesterday. He then informed me that the President was unwilling that he should proceed with the negotiations until he had answered your Lordship's despatch of the 22nd ultimo, of which I left a copy with him on the 5th. He wished especially to send a reply on the charge that the United States' Government were now claiming a right which they had disputed when asserted by Russia before the cession of Alaska. Mr. Blaine promised me this reply before the end of the week, after which he would be ready to resume our interviews. L complained of the delay, pointing out the danger of " some untoward event,'' and again urged him to give me an assurance that whde the negotiations were continuing there should be no interference with our vessels; such assurance he declined to give, but he said there was little likelihood of anything of the kind happening before July. I think that the protest contained in your Lordship's despatch of the 29th May should be sent in before the Revenue cutters are beyond the reach of instructions. 479 Subject to your Lordship's approval, I propose to send in the protest on the 14th instant, informing Mr. Blaine that I have deferred doing so until the last moment. No. 355. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 11.) (Telegraphic.) AT the interview Washington, June 10, 1890. with Mr. Blaine mentioned in my immediately preceding telegram, referring to his note of the 4th instant,* I stated that your Lordship regretted that the President should think you wanting in conciliation, that this was probably due to his being unaware that by British law legislation was necessary before any British vessel could be excluded from any part of the high seas. Legislative sanction was also required for any measures necessary for the preservation of the seal species, and Her Majesty's Government have always been willing to negotiate for the adoption of such measures. As regards the expressions attributed to your Lordship by Mr. Blaine in his note, I informed him that you did not recognize them, and that you certainly did not think you could have used them in the context mentioned. No. 356. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Substance telegraphed, June 11.) My Lord, Washington, June 11, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inclose copy of the note from Mr. Blaine referred to in my telegram of to-day, together with a copy of the reply which I have returned thereto. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 1 in No. 356. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Washington, June 11, 1890. I HAVE shown to the President the extract from the telegram of Lord Salisbury of the 9th June, in which his Lordship states that "it is beyond the power of Her Majesty's Government to exclude British or Canadian ships from any portion of the high seas, even for an hour, without legislative sanction." Not stopping to comment upon the fact that his Lordship assumes the waters surrounding the Pribyloff Islands to be " the high seas," the President instructs me to say that it would satisfy this Government if Lord Salisbury would, by public Proclamation, simply request that vessels sailing under the British flag should abstain from entering the Behring's Sea for the present season. If this request shall be complied with, there will be full time for impartial negotiations, and, as the President hopes, for a friendly conclusion of the differences between the two Governments. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. Inclosure 2 in No. 356. Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Sir, I HAVE the honour to acknowledi Washington, June 11, 1890. your note of this day with reference to the passage in a telegram from the Marquis of Salisbury which I communicated to you at our interview of the 9th instant, to the effect that " it is beyond the power of Her Majesty's Government to exclude British or Canadian ships from any portion of the high seas, even for an hour, without legislative sanction." * See Inclosure 1 in No. 363. 480 You inform me that without commenting .on the fact that his Lordship assumes the waters surrounding the Pribyloff Islands to be the high seas, the President instructs you to say that it would satisfy your Government if Lord Salisbury would, by public Proclamation, simply request that vessels sailing under the British flag should abstain from entering the Behring's Sea for the present season. You add, if this request shall be complied with, there will be full time for impartial negotiations, and, as the President hopes, for a friendly conclusion of the differences between the two Governments, I have telegraphed the above communication to Lord Salisbury, and I await his Lordship's instructions thereon. In the meanwhile, I take this opportunity of informing you that I reported to his Lordship by telegraph that at the same interview I again pressed you for an assurance that British sealing-vessels would not be interfered with in the Behring's Sea by United States' Revenue cruizers while the negotiations continued,, but you replied that you could not give such assurance. I trust this is not a final decision, and that, in the course of the next few days, while there is yet time to communicate with the Commanders, instructions will be sent to them to abstain from such interference. It is in this hope that I have delayed delivering the formal protest of Her Majesty's Government announced in my note of the 23rd May. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 357. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, June 11, 1890. IN reply to your telegram of yesterday, you may present the Protest. No. 358. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 12.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, June 11, 1890. REFERRING to my previous telegram of to-day, I presume that Her Majesty's Government have no objection to refer to arbitration the question of the legal right of the United States' Government to exclude British sealing-vessels from Behring's Sea. If this be so, I should be glad to know whether they would consent that the proposed Proclamation should be issued on the express conditions that the United States' Government shall not interfere with our flag this season, and, if the award be against them, shall at once pay damages for past interference, and compensate British sealers for losses-, sustained by them in complying with the Proclamation. No. 359. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, June 12, 1890. IN reply to your telegram of yesterday, I have to state that there are serious constitutional difficulties in the way of your proposal. But it might save time if, without prejudice to either side, you could ask the Government of the United States whether, supposing Her Majesty's Government were to agree to issue a Proclamation, and as to its terms, the United States' Government will agree to the three conditions formulated by you, namely, to refer the legality of their proceedings to arbitration, to abstain from any interference with the British flag, and, in case of an adverse award, to pay for damages resulting from the Proclamation. 481 No. 360. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, June 12, 1890. REFER.RING to my previous telegram of to-day's date, if we could come to terms on this proposal we would suggest some such kind of Proclamation as the following:— " Whereas, the United States and Her Majesty's Government have agreed to refer to arbitration the legality of the action of the United States in making certain captures of British vessels in the Behring's Sea; and whereas the United States have engaged if the award should be adverse to them to pay compensation not only for past interference, but for any loss arising from abstention from sealing consequent on this Proclamation. Captains are hereby requested not to seal in Behring's Sea during the present season." No. 361. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 13.) My Lord, Washington, June 3, 1890. I HAVE the honour to inform your Lordship that, since the receipt of Mr. Blaine's note of the 29th ultimo, informing me of the rejection of the draft Convention by his Government, I have been in constant communication with him, with the view of coming to some possible settlement of the Behring's Sea question. On the 30th ultimo Mr. Blaine informed me that he was to have an interview with the President, the result of which he promised to communicate to me as soon as possible. I accordingly received a note from him last night, a copy of which is inclosed herewith, in which he states that the President is of opinion that an arbitration could not be concluded in time for this season, but he is anxious to know " whether Lord Salisbury; in order to promote a friendly solution of the question, will make for a single season the Regulation which in 1888 he offered to make permanent." Your Lordship will observe that the above proposal is identical with that contained at the conclusion of Mr. Blaine's note of the 29th ultimo. In view of the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 31st ultimo, and in order to save time, I at once wrote a note, a copy of which is also inclosed> to Mr. Blaine in reply, in which I informed him that Her Majesty's Government were not prepared to agree to such a Regulation as was suggested by Mr. Blaine. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 1 in No. 361. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. My dear Sir Julian, Department of State, Washington, June 2, 1890. I HAVE had a prolonged interview with the President on the matters upon which we are endeavouring to come to an agreement touching the fur-seal question. The President expresses the opinion that an arbitration could not be concluded in time for this season. Arbitration is of little value unless it is conducted with the most careful deliberation. What the President most anxiously desires to know is whether Lord Salisbury, in order to promote a friendly solution of the question, will make for a single season the Regulation which in 1888 he offered to make permanent. The President regards that as the step which will lead most certainly and most promptly to a friendly agreement between the two Governments. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. [128] 3 Q 482 Inclosure 2 in No. 361. Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Ill 1 Wm ii "I'm. ISJT Dear Mr. Blaine, Washington, June 3, 1890. IN reply to your letter of yesterday evening touching the fur-seal question, I beg to state that I am in a position to answer at once the inquiry " whether Lord Salisbury, in order to promote a friendly solution of the question, will make for a single season the Regulation which in 1888 he offered to make permanent." The words which I quote from your letter have reference, no doubt, to the proposal of the United States that British sealing-vessels should be entirely excluded from the Behring's Sea during the seal fishery season. I shall not attempt to discuss here whether what took place in the course of the abortive negotiations of 1888 amounted to an offer on the part of Lord Salisbury "to make such a regulation permanent." It wiR suffice for the present purpose to state that the further examination of the question which has taken place has satisfied his Lordship that such an extreme measure as that proposed in 1888 goes far beyond the requirements of the case. Her Majesty's Government are quite willing to adopt all measures which shaU be satisfactorily proved to be necessary for the preservation of the fur seal species, and to enforce such measures on British subjects by proper legislation. But they are not prepared to agree to such a regulation as is suggested in your letter, for the present fishery season, as, apart from other considerations, there would be no legal power to enforce its observance on British subjects and British vessels. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 362. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.'—'{Received June 14.) Sir, Downing Street, June 13, 1890. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Governor-General of Canada, forwarding a claim from the owners of the " Pathfinder" for the detention of that vessel at Neagh Bay in March last. I am, &c. (Signed) EDWARD WINGFIELD. Inclosure 1 in No. 362. Lord Stanley of Preston to Jjord Knutsford. My Lord, Government House, Ottawa, May 20, 1890. I HAVE tbe honour to forward herewith, for transmission to the United States' authorities, a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council of Canada, to which is attached a formal declaration of the managing owner of the British schooner | Pathfinder," setting forth the particulars of the seizure of that vessel in Neagh Bay, in the State of Washington, by the United States' Revenue cutter " Corwin," and preferring a claim for damages to the amount of 3,000 dollars against the United States' Government in consequence of the said seizure. Your Lordship has already been informed in the Deputy Governor's despatch of the 23rd October last of the circumstances of the former seizure of this vessel in Behring's Sea on the 27th August last by the same United States' cruizer. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. 483 Inclosure 2 in No. 362. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 12th May, 1890. ON a Report dated the 23rd April, 1890, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, submitting, in connection with previous Reports on the subject of seizures of British fishing-vessels in the Behring's Sea, and more particularly with reference to the Minute of Council approved by your Excellency on the 14th September, 1889, detailing the circumstances of the seizure of the schooner | Pathfinder," a formal declaration of the managing owner of the " Pathfinder," in which are set forth particulars of the subsequent seizure of the vessel in Neagh Bay, in the State of Washington, United States of America, on the evening of the 27th March, 1890, by the United States' Revenue cutter "Thomas D.' Corwin ; " the Commander having recognized the " Pathfinder " as a vessel which had been seized in Behring's Sea during the previous year. The "Pathfinder" sought Neagh Bay through stress of weather, and was undergoing repairs at the time of the second seizure. The vessel was towed to Port Townsend and placed in charge of officers from the Revenue cutter, until released on the afternoon of the 29th March. The Minister further submits a claim advanced by Mr. William Munsie, of Victoria, British Columbia, merchant, as managing owner of the vessel in question, amounting to 3,000 dollars for loss resulting and expenses by reason of the seizure. The Committee on the recommendation of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, advise that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute, together with the paper herewith, to the Right Honourable the Secretary of State for the Colonies, for transmission to the Government of the United States. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. Inclosure 3 in No. 362. Declaration of Mr. W. Munsie. Dominion of Canada, Province of British Columbia, City of Victoria. I, WILLIAM MUNSIE, of the city of Victoria, in the Province of British Columbia, merchant, solemnly and sincerely declare as follows :— 1. I am the managing owner of the hereinafter mentioned schooner " Pathfinder," duly registered at the port of Victoria aforesaid. 2. The said schooner is employed exclusively in the sealing business, and left the port of Victoria on or about the 17th January last on a sealing voyage along the Pacific coast, south of Vancouver Island. 3. On or about the 8th February last the "Pathfinder" returned to Victoria for repairs, and sailed again for the same purpose on or about the 12th February last. 4. On or about the 23rd day of March last, when off Cape Flattery, the " Pathfinder " encountered a storm and became disabled by the breaking of the tiller-band, and was forced to find shelter in the nearest harbour, Neagh Bay, in the State of Washington, United States of America, lying about 9 miles from Cape Flattery. Tbe "Pathfinder" anchored in Neagh Bay on the 26th March last. On the evening of the 27th March, while still lying in said bay, undergoing repairs, an officer from the United States' Revenue cutter "Thomas D. Corwin," boarded the "Pathfinder" and asked for the ship's papers. These were banded to him, inspected by him, and in reply to a question by the captain of the | Pathfinder " as to whether they were all right, he replied that he woull report to the Captain of the cutter. Next morning the Captain of the cutter sent an officer on board the I Pathfinder " with a request that her captain would go on board the cutter and take his papers with him. The captain did so, and after looking over the papers the Captain of the cutter said he recognized the " Pathfinder'' as a vessel which had been seized last year, and that he must detain her, as the law must be maintained. He then ordered the captain of the "Pathfinder" to heave his anchor, and said he would take the "Pathfinder " to the nearest telegraph station, which was Port Angeles. The captain of the | Pathfinder" protested against being removed, and declined to hoist anchor. The [128] 3'Q 2 484 lilll IB I Captain of the cutter replied that if he did not hoist anchor men would be sent from the cutter to do so. Upon this the captain of the " Pathfinder" went back to his vessel and ordered his men to heave the anchor up. The " Pathfinder " was then taken in tow by the cutter, and taken to Port Townsend. At that place two officers from the cutter were placed on board the " Pathfinder," and remained in charge until the " Pathfinder " was released. The captain of the " Pathfinder " entered a protest from the office of the Collector of Customs, Port Townsend, and also filed a protest with the Captain of the cutter. After doing so he was persuaded to withdraw both protests until reply had been received from Washington as to what disposition would be made of the " Pathfinder." 5. The "Pathfinder" was released on the afternoon of the 29th March last, and arrived at Victoria aforesaid on the morning of the 31st March last. 6. By reason of the said seizure or detention of the " Pathfinder," her owners have lost at least a week of the best period of the spring seasons for sealing. In consequence, also, of the seizure and detention, a number of the crew of the "Pathfinder" have deserted, causing inconvenience and loss in filling their places. 7. In respect of tbe said seizure and detention, and of the losses thereby resulting, and for the expenses incurred by reason of such seizure or detention, I, as managing owner of the " Pathfinder," claim of and from the Government of the United States as damages the sum 3,000 dollars. And I, William Munsie, make this solemn declaration, conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the Acts respecting extra-judicial oaths. (L.S.) (Signed) WM. MUNSIE. Declared at the city of Victoria, British Columbia, this 3rd day of April, a.d. 1890, Before me, (Signed) Arthur L. Belyea, A Notary Public by Royal Authority in and for the Province of British Columbia. No. 363. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 16.) My Lord, Washington, June 6, 1890. WITH reference to my despatch of the 3rd instant, I have the honour to inclose copy of a further note which I have received from Mr. Blaine on the subject of the proposed exclusion of British sealers from Behring's Sea during the present season, together with the reply which I have sent thereto. I have, &c. (Signed) J. PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 1 in No. 363. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Department of State, Washington, June 4, 1890. I HAVE your favour of the 2nd instant. The President sincerely regrets that his considerate and most friendly proposal for adjustment of all troubles connected with the Behring's Sea should be so promptly rejected. The paragraph in your note in which you refer to Lord Salisbury's position needs explanation. I quote it in full:— " It will suffice for the present purpose to state that the further examination of the question which has taken place has satisfied his Lordship that such an extreme measure as that proposed in 1888 goes far beyond the requirements of the case." . I do not know what may have been the " examination of the question" that "has satisfied Lord Salisbury that srich an extreme measure as that proposed in 1888 goes far beyond the requirements of the case." I only know that the most extreme measure proposed came from Lord Salisbury himself, in suggesting a close season as far south as the 47th parallel of latitude, to last from the 15th April to the 1st October in each year. 485 At the dose of his negotiations with Mr. Phelps, in September 1888, his Lordship, still approving the " measures to prevent the wanton destruction of so valuable an industry," declared, apparently with regret, that "the Canadian Government objected to any such restrictions " (i.e., as those which his Lordship had in part proposed and wholly approved), and that, "until its consent would be obtained, Her Majesty's Government was not willing to enter into the Convention." It is evident, therefore, that in 1888 Lord Salisbury abruptly closed the negotiations because, in his own phrase, | the Canadian Government objected." He assigned no other reason whatever, and, until your note of the 2nd was received, this Government had never been informed that his Lordship entertained any other objections than those expressed in September 1888. It is proper to recall to your recollection that at divers times in personal conversation I have proposed to you, on behalf of this Government, a close season materially shorter in point of time than was voluntarily offered by Lord Salisbury, and much less extended in point of space. Instead of going as far south as the 47th parallel, I have frequently indicated the willingness of this Government to take the dividing line between the Pacific Ocean and the Behring's Sea—the line which is tangent to the southernmost island of the Aleutian group—being as near as may be the 50th parallel of north latitude. Early in April you will remember that you suggested to me the advantage that might follow if the sailing of Revenue cutters for Behring's Sea could be postponed till the middle of May. Though that was a matter entirely under the control of the Treasury Department, Secretary Windom promptly complied with your request, and by the President's direction a still longer postponement was ordered in the hope that some form of equitable adjustment might be proposed by Her Majesty's Government. Even the Revenue cutter which annually passes through Behring's Sea carrying supplies to the relief station at Point Barrow in the Arctic Ocean—72nd degree of north latitude—was held back, lest her appearance in Behring's Sea might be misrepresented as a non-observance of the understanding between us. It is perfectly clear that if your claim for British vessels to kill seals within 10 miles of the Pribyloff Islands, directly after the mothers are delivered of their young, should be granted, the Behring's Sea would swarm with vessels engaged in sealing, not forty or fifty as now, but many hundreds, through the summer months. If that privilege should be given to Canadian vessels, it must of course be conceded at once to American vessels. If the rookeries are to be thrown open to Canadians, they would certainly, as matter of common right, be thrown open to citizens of the United States. The seal-mothers, which require an area of from 40 to 50 miles from the islands on all sides to secure food for their young, would be slaughtered by hundreds of thousands, and in a brief space of time there would be no seals in the Behring's Sea. Similar causes have uniformly produced similar effects. Seal rookeries in all parts of the world have been destroyed in that way. The present course of Great Britain will produce the same effect on the only seal rookery of any value left in the waters of the oceans and seas of the globe. The United States have leased the privilege of sealing because only in that way can the rookeries be preserved, and only in that way can this Government derive a revenue from the Pribyloff Islands. Great Britain would perhaps gain something for a few years, but it would be at the expense of destroying a valuable interest belonging to a friendly nation, an interest which the civilized world desires to have preserved. I observe that you quote Treasury Agent George R. Tingle, in your despatch of the 30th April, as showing that,' notwithstanding the depredations of marauders, the total number of seals had increased in the Behring's Sea. The rude mode of estimating the total number can readily lead to mistakes, and other agents have differed from Mr. Tingle. But, aside from the correctness or incorrectness of Mr. Tingle's conclusions on that point, may I ask upon what grounds do the Canadian vessels assert a claim, unless they assume that they have a title to the increase of the seal herd? If the claim of the United States to the seals of the Pribyloff Islands be well founded, we are certainly entitled to the increase as much as a sheep-grower is entitled to the increase of his flock. Having introduced Mr. Tingle, who has very extensive knowledge touching the seals in Behring's Sea, as well as the habits of the Canadian marauders, I trust you will not discredit' his testimony. The following statement, made by Mr. Tingle in his official Report to the Treasury Department at the close of the season of 1887, is respectfully commended to your consideration:— 486 Hill 11 am now convinced, from what I gather in questioning the men belonging to captured schooners, and from reading the logs of the vessels, that not more than one seal in ten killed and mortally wounded is landed on the boats and skinned; thus you will see the wanton destruction of seal life without any benefit whatever. I think 30,000 skins taken this year is a low estimate on this basis; 300,000 fur-seals were killed to secure that number, or three times as many as the Alaska Commercial Company are allowed by law to kill. You can readily see that this great slaughter of seals will in a few years make it impossible for 100,000 skins to be taken on the islands by the lessees. I earnestly hope more rigorous measures will be adopted by the Government in dealing with these destructive law-breakers." Both of Mr. Tingle's statements are made in his official capacity, and in both cases he had no temptation to state anything except what he honestly believed to be the truth. The President does not conceal his disappointment that, even for the sake of securing an impartial arbitration of the question at issue, Her Majesty's Government is not willing to suspend for a single season the practice which Lord Salisbury described in 1888 as " the wanton destruction of a valuable industry," and which this Government has uniformly regarded as an unprovoked invasion of its established rights. I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. Inclosure 2 in No. 363. Si Hr J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Sir, Washington, June 6, 1890. I HAVE the honour to acknowledge the receipt of your official note of the 4th instant, commenting upon the reply which I returned to the inquiry contained in your letter of the 2nd instant- whether the Marquis of Salisbury would, in order to promote a friendly solution of the fur-seal question, agree to the total exclusion of British sealers from the Behring's Sea during the present fishery season. You expressed the regret of the President that " bis considerate and most friendly proposal for the adjustment of all trouble connected with the Behring's Sea should be so promptly rejected." I have this day transmitted a copy of your note to Lord Salisbury, and, pending further instructions, I will abstain from pursuing the discussion on the various points with which it deals, especially as the views of Her Majesty's Government on the main questions involved are stated with great precision in Lord Salisbury's despatch of the 22nd May, which I had the honour to read to you yesterday, and of which, in accordance with your desire, I left a copy in your hands. I would only observe that, as regards the sufficiency or insufficiency of the radius of 10 miles around the rookeries " within which Her Majesty's Government propose that sealers should be excluded," no opportunity was afforded me of discussing the question before the proposals of Her Majesty's Government were summarily rejected. I may mention also that I fear there has been some misapprehension as regards a request which you appear to have understood me to make respecting the date of the sailing of United States' Revenue cutters for Behring's Sea. I have no recollection of having made any suggestion with reference to those Revenue cutters, except that their Commanders should receive explicit instructions not to apply the Municipal Law of the United States to British vessels in Behring's Sea outside of territorial waters. I have, &c. (Signed) J. PAUNCEFOTE. No. 364. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received June 18.) Sir, Downing Street, June 17, 1890. I AM directed by Lord Knutsford to transmit to you, for the information of the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of the Annual Report for 1889 of the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries. I am to call attention to the Report on the fur-seal fishery. I am, &c. (Signed) JOHN BRAMSTON. 487 Inclosure in No. 364. Extract from the Annual Report of the Department of Fisheries, Dominion of Canada, for the calendar year 1889. Marine Furs. THE Returns show an increase in the catch this season of 5,587 fur-sealskins, and twenty-five sea-otters. There were 1,922 more sealskins taken on the coast by our vessels than in 1888, and 2,558 more by foreigners, who sold their catches in Victoria. The following Table shows the detailed catch of the sealing fleet for this season :— Return showing the Number of Vessels, Boats, and Men engaged ina the Marine Fur Fishery of British Columbia, with the Products and Values, for the Season of 1889. 03 O C os ht in Sea. 1 ' IS Name of Vessel. Name of Owner. so o O o 3 ° ° S 1 l^ 03 oO o 3 to n Total Nun Seals. Value. I Dollars. Pathfinder .. .. • Carne and Munsie .. 66 6 24 942 48 990 9,900 Viva ,, ,, . . 92 6 22 1,481 2,182 3,663 36,630 Mary Tavlor .. 42 11 25 748 . , 748 7,480 Theresa .. .. Babbingtou and Co... 63 7 23 482 828 1,310 13,100 Annie C. Moore .. C. Haokett 213 7 23 802 1,318 2,120 21,200 Lily Morris Moss .. 70 18 41 500 532 1,032 10,320 Penelope 70 6 21 384 1,769 2,180 21,800 Lily 68 13 26 280 74 354 3,540 Sapphire E. B. Marvin 123 25 52 1,364 1,626 2,990 20,900 Aurora Adolph W asburg .. 41 13 38 816 . , 816 8,160 Juanita Hall and Goepel 40 13 29 . 135 29 164 1,640 Ariel E. W. Bucknam 90 6 22 934 1,400 2,334 23,340 Kate Chas. Spring .. 58 10 24 624 800 1,424 14,240 Favorite .. .. . .. 79 10 25 340 1,764 2,104 21,040 Maggie Mack J. Dodd .. 70 6 25 777 1,290 2,067 20,670 W. P. Sayward J. D. Warren 59 12 29 557 1,643 2,200 22,000 Minnie .. .. Victor Jacobsen 46 10 21 200 500 700 7,000 Mountain Chief »• 26 5 13 210 # , 210 2,100 Wanderer .. .. H. Payton.. .. 15 6 15 178 . . 178 1,780 Black Diamond M. Moss 81 12 29 629 55 684 6,840 Beatrice .. .. Wm. Grant 67 7 22 500 700 1,200 12,000 Sierra .. J , 10 2 5 80 .. 80 800 Winifred .. 10 2 5 22 .. 22 220 1,499 213 559 12,985 16,585 29,570 295,700 Sea-otter caught by seal: ng fleet, 15, at 100 dolla rs each. 1,500 Estimate of seals purcha *ed from Indians .. . . .. . . . . 4,000 40,000 „ sea-otter pur chased from Indians, 101 ), at 10 ) dollar 3 each . . , . .. 10,000 ,, hair seals, 7. 000 d total by Canadian vess els •• •• •• •■ •• 2,625 Gran 33,570 349,825 IIP- life Number of Number of Vessel. Seals caught on Seals caught Total Number xxame oi British in of Seals. Total Value. Columbia coast. Behring's Sea. Dollars. Walter L. Rich • , .. American 1,419 ., 1,419 14,100 San Diego , . ■ • w 69 .. 69 690 T. H. Lewis . . • • >. 242 ,. 242 2,420 Venture .. . i . . „ 317 .. 317 3,170 Allie S. Alger , , . • ?, 253 253 2,530 Harrv Dinnes , , • • 99 18 700 718 7,180 Lottie . . „ , , 625 625 6,250 Mollie Adams . , * • )) , # 1,553 1,553 15,530 Bessie llul-er fc . . • ., 525 525 5,250 Adele lby German foreigners 2:10 1,467 1,707 17,070 Tofc 2,5oS 4,870 7,428 74,280 It will thus be seen that there are more vessels in the trade than last year. j This was on account of an anticipated settlement of the Behring's Sea question. The vessels- had been previously purchased on the Atlantic coast for the purpose of prosecuting this trade in Behring's Sea, but when they reached this coast and found the question was still unsettled, they paid more attention to hunting on the coast. No. 365. Admiralty to Foreign Office.—(Received June 20.) Sir, Admiralty, June 19, 1890. I AM commanded by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty to transmit, for the perusal of the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, copies of two letters from Captain Hulton, of Her Majesty's ship " Amphion," respecting the Behring's Sea fishery. I am, &c. (Signed) EVAN MACGREGOR. ' Inclosure 1 in No. 365. Captain Hulton. to Admiralty. (Extract.) "Amphion," at Esquimalt, May 28, 1890. WITH reference to your recent telegrams to hasten the repairs of Her Majesty's ship " Amphion," if possible, she being very much required, and your inquiries as to the movements of the sealing fleet to Behring's Sea, I have the honour to supplement my telegraphic replies as follows:— I inclose herewith a list of the sailing-schooners cleared from Victoria for this season's fishing, and about to clear, furnished me by the Lieutenant-Governor, his Honour Hugh Eelson, in reply to my letter of which a copy is attached. The sealing fleet have just about finished their coast catching, moving slowly up from the Californian coast, and are now midway between Clayaquot Sound and the southernmost of the Shumagan Islands. The vessels mostly cleared in February and March, and few of them return till the autumn unless in distress of some sort, owing to difficulties with their crews, with, drunkenness and desertion. One or two vessels communicate with them from time to time, bringing back the catches of skins, &c. As they work north they replenish at a sealing store in Clayaquot Sound, and by the end of June they have all assemhled in the Shumagan Islands, and are mostly to be found in North-East Harbour, on the southernmost but one of the islands of that group. A second point at which the vessels are then to be found is at Sand Point, about 50' to the northward of North-East Harbour, where the vessels beach to clean and repair, re victual and water. 489 A third harbour which they use, a little north of Sand Point, is Falmouth Harbour, but it is smaller, and not so much frequented. About the 20th June a small vessel (probably a small steam-tug) will go up to the above rendezvous with letters, &c, and to receive skins; she would arrive there about the 27th or 28th June, and the schooners would again weigh and get amongst tbe seals, working their way to the passes, principally the Unimak anil the 72nd Pass, as it is called (172° west longitude). These passes the vessels all go through between the 1st and 10th July. The time the vessels are in the Behring's Sea is from tbe 1st or 10th July to about the 15th or 80th September, though, if a vessel is lucky, she has frequently left by the latter half of August, not to return again that season. Inclosure 2 in No. 365. Captain Hulton to Lieutenant-Governor Nelson. Sir, "Amphion," at Esquimalt, May 23, 1890. I HAVE the honour to request that you will be good enough to instruct the Collector of Customs to furnish me as quickly as possible with a detailed list of the seal.ng- vessels owned by British subjects that have been cleared for the north (presumably for Behring's Sea) for this summer's sealing. On the list, I am anxious to have shown me the tonnage and rig of the vessels, names of the captains, numbers of their crews, and the names and addresses of their owners; and I further request that the Collector of Customs may be directed to give me ■every assistance in getting the fullest information possible. I have, &c. (Signed) E. GREY HULTON. Inclosure 3 in No. 365. Special Memorandum for Lieutenant-Governor Nelson. Sealing Vessels cleared for Behring's Sea. No. Schooner. Master. Tons. Crew. 1 Juanita, now Mascot ' .. L. Olsen 40 4 2 Black Diamond, now Katharine .. H. Smih .. 81 5 3 Mollie Adams, now E. B. Marvin .. .. R. E. McKeill .. 118 23 4 Walter L. Rich H. F. Siewerd .. 76 23 5 Ocean Belle .. .. .. .. \Y. O. Leai-y 86 23 6 Venture.. .. .. .. .. J. McLeod 48 4 7 W. P. Sayward G. P. Ferey .. eo 7 8 Sea Lion .. .. F. Magnesen .. .. 50 24 9 Triumph ., .. (!. Cos 98 20 10 Maggie Mack .. .. .. JohnM. Dodd .. 71 21 11 Minnie .. .. . .. V. Jacobsm 46 10 12 Sapphire .. .. W. Cox 126 9 13 Mary Taylor .. .. ., J. Davenport .. .. 43 3 14 Lily .. .. .. .. .. G. McOnuld .. 69 6 15 Aurora .. .. .. .. F. tltiro'd 41 4 16 Penelope .. .. .. A. C. Folder 41 20 17 Theresa.. .. .. .. .. John Steele .. .. 63 '/3 18 Favorite L. McLean .. .. 64 6 19 Vi\a .. .. .. .. ». W.E.Baker .. 92 23 20 Mary Ellen 11 McLean 63 27 21 Mountain Chief .. James Newassum (Indian i 23 5 22 Siena .. ,. .. .. .. Thos. Cheetmatlet (Indian) 25 5 23 Kate .. .. .. .. .. O. Thomas 53 5 24 Wanderer .. .. .. Hy. Paxion .. .. 26 About to clear. [128] The before-mentioned all of Victoria Registry. 3 R 490 These last-mentioned of Registry at Ports named. No. Schooner. Muster. Tons. i Crew. 25 Annie C. Moore C. Hackett, of Shelbourne, Nova Scotia 117 j 22 1 26 Ariel .. .. John Reilly, of St, John's, Newfoundland 90 7 27 C. H. Tupper • • • • .. C. S. Kelly .. 99 9 28 Beatrice C. Keefa •• 5 Of Shangbae, but of British Registry. 29 Carmelite Is overdue from Halifax. Particulars not as yet obtainable. The following of Foreign Registry. 30 Adele .. .. German, registered at Shansrhae. G. W. O. Hansen And some five vessels of United States' sealing-schooners that make this their port of departure. (Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs. Inclosure 4 in No. 365. Further Memorandum in re Sealers for Captain Hulton. No. Schooner. 1 Juanita, now Mascot John Kinsman 64 shares. 2 Black Diamond, now Katharine John L. Penny Ditto. 3 Mollie Adams, now E. B. Marvin John G. Cox Managing owner. 4 Pathfinder, now Pioneer .. William Munsie Ditto. 5 Walter L. Rich Charles' N. Cameron.. Ditto. 6 Ocean Belle .. .. .. John Kinsman Ditto. 7 Venture.. Donald Urquhart Ditto. 8 W. P. Sayward Andrew Laing Ditto. 9 Sea 1 ion .. .. George Collins .. 64 shares. 10 Triumph .. .. ,. John G. Cox Managing owner. 11 Maggie Mack .. .. .. John Dodd.. Ditto. 12 Minnie .. .. .. .. V. Jacobsen .. 64 shares. 13 Sapphire .. .. ,. John G. Cox Managing owner. 14 Mary Taylor .. .. .. William Munsie .. Ditto. 15 Lily V. Jacobsen .. Ditto. 16 Aurora .. .. .. <.. A. Wasberg .. Ditto. 17 Penelope Morris Moss Ditto. 18 Theresa .. .. P. A. Babbington .. Ditto. 19 Favorite .. .. .. Charles Spring 64 shares. 20 Viva .. .. ., William Munsie Managing owner. 21 Mary Allen Morris Moss 64 shares. 22 Mountain Chief .. .. ,. James Newassum .. Managing owner. 23 Sierra .. .. .. .. Thos. Cheetmatlet .. Ditto. 24 Kate Charles Spring 64 shares. 25 Wanderer .. .. „. Hy. Paxton Managing owner. 26 27 28 29 30 Annie C. Moore Ariel .. ('. H. Tupper Beatrice Carmelite .. .. Not recorded in Victoria, B.C. Ditto. Ditto. Ditto. Ditto. 31 Adele .. .. .. ,. A German vessel, registered in Rhanghae. The five United States' sealers mentioned in List No. 1 are, of course, not of record at Victoria, B.C. Note.—The address of all the above-mentioned owners is Victoria, B.C., with the exception of John L. Penny, of the schooner " Katharine," whose address is Clayaquot Sound, B.C., via Victoria, B.C. (Signed) A. R. MILNE, Collector of Customs and Registrar of Shipping. 491 No. 366. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, June 20, 1890. I HAVE to acknowledge your despatch of the 30th ultimo, inclosing copy of a note from Mr. Blaine, dated the 29th ultimo. It contains several references to communications which passed between the two Governments in the time of Mr. Blaine's predecessor, especially in the spring of 1888. Without referring at present to other portions of Mr. Blaine's note, I wish only now to point out some error in the impressions which he has gathered from the records in his office with respect to those communications. He states that on the 23rd April of that year I informed the American Charge" d'Affaires, Mr. White, that it was proposed to give effect to a Seal Convention by Order in Council, not by Act of Parliament. This was a mistake. It was very natural that Mr. White should not have apprehended me correctly when I was describing the somewhat complicated arrangements by which Agreements of this kind are brougHt into force in England. But two or three days after the 23rd April he called to make inquiry on the subject, and, in reply to his question, the following letter was addressed to him by my instructions :— . I My dear White, I Foreign Office, April 27, 1888. I Lord Salisbury desires me to express his regret that he is not yet in a position to make any further communication to you on the subject of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea. After his interview with you and M. de Staal he had to refer to the Canadian Government, the Board of Trade, and the Admiralty, but has as yet only obtained the opinion of the Admiralty. The next step is to bring a Bill into Parliament. " Tours, &c. (Signed) "Eric Barrington." On the 28th Mr. White replied :— "Legation of the United States, London, " My dear Barrington, " April 28, 1888. " Thanks for your note, respecting the final sentence of which, ' The next step is to bring a Bill into Parliament,' I must trouble you with a line. " I understood Lord Salisbury to say when I saw him with M. de Staal, and again last week alone, that it is now proposed to give effect to the Conventional arrangement for the protection of seals by an Order in Council, not by Act of Parliament. "When Mr. Phelps left, the latter was thought necessary, and last week I received a telegram from the Secretary of State, asking me to obtain confidentially a copy of the proposed Act of Parliament, with a view to assimilating our contemplated Act of Gongress thereto. I replied, after seeing Lord Salisbury last Saturday, that there would be no Bill introduced in Parliament, but an Order in Council. " May I ask if this be now incorrect, as, in that event, I should particularly like to correct my former statement by this day's mail." To this the following reply was on the same date addressed to Mr. White :— " My dear White, " Foreign Office, April 28, 1888. "Lord Salisbury is afraid that he did not make himself understood when last he spoke to you about the Seal Fisheries Convention. I An Act of Parliament is necessary to give power to our authorities to act on the provisions of the Convention when it is signed. The Order in Council will be merely the machinery which the Act will provide for the purpose of bringing its provisions into force. The object of this machinery is to enable the Government to wait till the other two Powers are ready. But neither Convention nor Bill is drafted yet, because we have not got the opinions from Canada, which are necessary to enable us to proceed. " Tours, &c. (Signed) "Eric Barrington." It is evident from this correspondence that if the United States' Government was misled upon the 23rd April into the belief that Her Majesty's Government could proceed in the matter without an Act of Parliament, or could proceed without [128] 3 R 2 492 previous reference to Canada, it was a mistake which must have been entirely dissipated by the correspondence which followed in the ensuing week. Mr. Blaine is also under a misconception in imagining that I ever gave any verbal assurance, or any promise of any kind, with respect to the terms of the projected Convention. Her Majesty's Government always have been, and are still, ■anxious for the arrangement of a Convention which shall provide whatever close time in whatever localities is necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species. But I have always represented that the details must be the subject of discussion, a discussion to which those who are locally interested must of necessity contribute. I find the record of the following; conversation about the date to which Mr. Blaine refers:— The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir Li West, Sir, Foreign Office, March 17, 1888. "Since forwarding to you my despatch of the 22nd ultimo, I have been irt communication with the Russian Ambassador at this Court, and have invited his Excellency to ascertain whether his Government would authorize him to discuss with Mr. Phelps and myself the suggestion made by Mr. Bayard in his despatch of the 7th February, that concerted action should be taken by the United States, Great Britain, and other interested Powers, in order to preserve from extermination the fur-seals which at certain seasons are found in Behring's Sea. "Copies of the correspondence on this question which has passed between M. de Staal and myself is inclosed herewith. 11 request 'that you will inform Mr. Bayard of the steps which have been taken, with a view to the initiation of negotiations for an Agreement between the three Powers principally concerned in the maintenance of the seal fisheries. But in so doing, you should state that this action, on the part of Her Majesty's Government, must not be taken as an admission of the rights of jurisdiction in Behring's Sea exercised there by the United States' authorities, during the fishing seasons of 1886-S7 and 1S87-8S, nor as affecting the claims which Her Majesty's Government will have to present on account of the wrongful seizures which have taken place of British vessels engaged in the seal fishing industry. "I am, &c. (Signed) " Salisbury." In pursuance of this despatch, the suggestion made by Mr. Bayard io which I referred was discussed, and negotiations were initiated for an Agreement between, the three Powers. The following despatch contains the record of what I believe was the first meeting between the Representatives of the three Powers upon the subject:— | The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir L. West. I Sir, I Foreign Office, April 16, 1888. "The Russian Ambassador and the United States Charge d'Affafres called upon me this afternoon to discuss the question of the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea, which had been brought into prominence by the recent action of the United States. "The United States' Government bad expressed a desire that some Agreement should be arrived at between the three Governments for the purpose of prohibiting the slaughter of the seals during the time of bleeding; and, at my request, M. de Staal had obtained instructions from his Government on that question. " At this preliminary discussion it was decided provisionally, in order to furnish a ' basis for negotiation, and without definitively pledging our Governments, that the space to be covered by the proposed Convention should be the sea betu een America and Russia north of the 47th degree of latitude; that the close time should extend from the 15th April to the 1st November; that during that time the slaughter of all seals should be forbidden, and vessels engaged in it should be liable to seizure by the cruizers of any of the three Powers, and should be taken to the port of their own nationality for condemnation; that the traffic in arms, alcohol, and powder should be prohibited in all the islands of those seas; and that, as soon as tbe three Powers had concluded a Convention, they should join in submitting it for the assent of the other Maritime Powers ot the Northern Seas. "The United States' Charge d'Affaires was exceedingly earnest in pressing on us the importance of disDatch on account of the inconceivable slaughter that had been, and 493 was still, going on in these seas. He stated that in addition to the vast quantity brought to market, it was a common practice for those engaged in the trade to shoot all seals they might meet in the open sea, and that of these a great number sank, so that their skins could not be recovered. " I am, &c. (Signed) " Salisbury." It was impossible to state more distinctly that any proposal made was provisional, and was merely made for the purpoose of enabling the requisite negotiations to proceed. The subsequent discussion of these proposals was undoubtedly delayed in consequence of the length of time occupied by the Canadian Government in collecting from considerable distances the information which they required before their opinion on the subject could be thoroughly formed, and after that it was delayed, L believe, chiefly in consequence of the political events in the United States unconnected with this question. I think it desirable to correct the misconceptions which have arisen with respect to these transactions; though I do not think that, even if the view of them which is taken by Mr. Blaine is accurate, they would bear out the argument which he founds upon them. I shall be glad if you will take the opportunity of informing Mr. Blaine of these corrections. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURT. No. 367. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, June 20, 1890. I HAVE received your despatch of the 3rd instant, and I approve the note which you addressed to Mr. Blaine in reply to his inquiry whether Her Majesty's Government would consent to "make for a single season the Regulation," as to the killing of seals in Behring's Sea, " which in 1888 they offered to make permanent." I am, &c. (Signed; SALISBURT. No. 368. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 21.) (Telegraphic") Washington, June 21, 1890. 1 HAVE the honour to report to your Lordship that a telegram is published in the "Washington Post" newspaper of to-day, dated Port Townsend, in Washington State, 20th June, stating that the Revenue cutter "Corwin" arrived there on the 18th ou its way to Behring's Sea, and will await further orders. Tn the same telegram it is stated that the | Rush " is at Seattle, in Washington State, and is awaiting orders at that port. No. 369. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. gir Foreign Office, June 21, 1890. I APPROVE the reply, inclosed in your despatch of the 6th instant, which you returned to Mr. Blaine's note of the 4th instant, in regard to the proposed exclusion of British sealing-vessels from Behring's Sea during the present season. It is unnecessary, in view of the observations contained in my despatch of the 20th instant, that I should discuss at any length the circumstances which led to an interruption of the negotiations in 1888. With regard, however, to Mr. Blaine's remarks that in 1888 I had abruptly closed 494 the negotiations because " the Canadian Government objected," and that £ I assigned no other reason whatever," I should wish you to call Mr. Blaine's attention to the statement of Mr. Phelps recorded in my despatch to Sir L. West of the 3rd April, 18S8, that "under the peculiar political circumstances of America at this moment, with a genera 1 election impending, it would be of little use, and, indeed, hardly practicable, to conduct any negotiation to its issue before the election had taken place." I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURY. No. 370. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 24.) My Lord, Washington, June 10, 1890. WITH reference to my telegram of to-day, I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of a Memorandum which I gave to Mr. Blaine at our interview ot yesterday on the subject of the inability of Her Majesty's Government to exclude British vessels from the high seas without legislative sanction. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. - Inclosure in No. 370. Memorandum. LORD SALISBURT regrets that the President of the United States should think him wanting in conciliation, but his Lordship cannot refrain from thinking that the President does not appreciate the difficulty arising from the law of England. It is entirely beyond the power of Her Majesty's Government to exclude British or Canadian ships from any portion of the high seas, even for an hour, without legislative sanction. Her Majesty's Government have always been willing, without pledging themselves to details on the questions of area and date, to carry on negotiations, hoping thereby to come to some arrangement for such a close season as is necessary in order to preserve the seal species from extinction, but the provisions of such an arrangement would always require legislative sanction, so that the measures thereby determined may be enforced. Lord Salisbury does not recognize the expressions attributed to him. He does not think that he can have used them, at all events in the context mentioned. No. 371. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received June 25.) (Telegraphic,) Washington, June 25, 1890 ALTHOUGH I have not yet received the Secretary of State's promised reply to your Lordship's despatch of the 22nd ultimo, and though he refuses to proceed with the negotiations until that reply is delivered, I am informed that he has announced his intention of leaving for the north in the course of next week. I therefore venture to suggest that I may be authorized to address at once to Mr. Blaine an official note, replying to the President's inquiry, in the sense of your Lordship's telegram of the 12th instant, viz., that the issue of a Proclamation as proposed by the President involves difficulties of a Constitutional nature, and Her Majesty's Government could only consent to issue it as part of a general settlement, and on the three conditions named below :— 1. That the question of the legal right of tbe United States' Government to interfere with British sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea be submitted to arbitration. 2. That, pending the result of the arbitration, the United States' Government cease all interference with British sealers outside of territorial waters. 4!5.r> 3. That, if the result of the arbitration be adverse to the United States' Government^ British subjects be compensated, not only for past interference, but also for ail losses' ensuing from their compliance with the Proclamation. No. 372. Colonial Office to Foreign Office.—(Received June 26.) (Extract.) Downing Street, June 25, 1890. "WITH reference to previous corresnondence, I am directed by Lord Knutsford to. transmit to you, to be laid before the Marquis of Salisbury, a copy of a despatch from the Govern or-General of Canada, forwarding an approved Minute of his Privy Council recommending that an assurance shoidd be sought from the United States that no attempt will be made to interfere with British vessels in Behring's. Sea during the present season. Inclosure 1 in No. 372. Lord Stanley of Preston to Lord Knutsford. My Lord, The Citadel, Quebec, June 12, 1890. WITH reference to previous correspondence on the subject of the seizures of Canadian sealing-vessels in Behring's Sea, I have the honour to forward herewith a copy of an approved Minute of the Privy Council, embodying a Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries. The Minister forcibly presents the grievance sustained by Canadian subjects in the course pursued by the United Stages' authorities in regard to this matter, and, in view of the fact that another sealing season has opened without any intimation of a withdrawal, on the part of the United States, of their extraordinary claim to jurisdiction over the waters of the open sea, he recommends that an assurance be sought from the United States' Government by Her Majesty's Government that the claim to jurisdiction beyond the 3-milc limit will be no longer insisted on. I have, &c. (Signed) STANLEY OF PRESTON. Inclosure 2 in No. 372. Report of a Committee of the Honourable the Privy Council, approved by his Excellency the Governor-General in Council on the 7th June, 1890. ON a Report, dated the 6th June, 1890, from the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, expressing regret that it again becomes necessary to call the attention of your Excellency to the long period which has elapsed since the illegal seizures of British sealing-vessels by United States' Revenue cutters occurred, and to the annual continuance of thig molestation: The Minister desires to remind your Excellency that the attention of the Imperial authorities has frequently been called to all the facts and circumstances connected with the different seizures which have occurred since 1885, and to observe that, notwithstanding the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown as to the absence of any justification on the part of the United States' authorities for the acts complained of, and despite the protests of the British Government which were presented to the Government of the United States, the great wrongs to British subjects go unredressed. The Minister would especially point out that as yet there has been no withdrawal on the part of the United States' authorities of the assertion of their right to prevent subjects of Her Majesty from engaging in hunting seals in the deep waters of Behring's Sea. The Minister observes that intense embarrassment and financial loss has been experienced in connection with the prosecution of this pursuit, due not only to actual arrests and molestation, but to intimidation caused by the attitude assumed on the part of the United States, ever since the year 1885, as regards the right of sealing in 496 Behring's Sea. As evidence of the strong desire on the part of your Excellency's advisers to cordially co-operate with the Imperial authorities in reaching, if possible, a friendly settlement, the Minister recalls the fact that upon the urgent request of Her Majesty's Government, the Government of Canada agreed to a discussion of the question of I close season for fur-seals in the Behring's Sea, notwithstanding the perpetration of the gross wrongs and injuries complained of by Canada, and in the absence of any definite assurance or offer of redress. The Minister desires to refer to the Minute of Council approved on the 13th day of March last, dealing at length with a note from the Honourable Mr. Blaine, Secretary of State for the United States, communicating the reply of the United States' Government to a protest by Mr. Edwardes, on the part of the Imperial Government, in October last, against the seizure in 1889 of Canadian vessels. After dealing very fully with the question, the Minute went on to say:— "Knowing the desire of both Her Majesty's Government and the Canadian people to maintain as friendly relations as possible with the people of the United States, the Minister recommends that. Her Majesty's Government be informed that your Excellency's advisers are prepared to discuss any proposed international arrangement for the proper protection of the fur-seal, but that before such an inquiry is completed they expect that the question raised by the seizures of Canadian vessels in the Behring's Sea shall be settled according to the law of nations, and that the claims for indemnity now in the hands of Her Majesty's Government shall be fully satisfied/' Tbe Minister further observes that while negotiations are in progress touching the question of a close season, another sealing season has begun without any intimation of a withdrawal on the part- of the United States of their extraordinary claim to jurisdiction over the wafers of the open sea, nor has any indemnification been made or assured to the subjects of Her Majesty who have suffered loss from the illegal acts on the part of the United States' authorities. Indeed, it is currently reported in the press of the United States and elsewhere that the United States' Revenue cutters will this year continue to interfere with and harass British sealers when in Behring's Sea. The Minister is of opinion that it is at least due to Her Majesty's subjects interested in this branch of industry to have authentic knowledge of the actual position to be taken in connection with Behring's Sea during the coming season by the authorities of the United States, and be, therefore, recommends that Her Majesty's Government be urged to obtain an' immediate assurance that the claim to jurisdiction or authority over sealing-vensels when beyond the 3-mile territorial limit in Behring's Sea will be no longer insisted upon. The Committee, concurring in the above Report of the Minister of Marine and Fisheries, recommend that your Excellency be moved to forward a copy of this Minute to the Right Honourable the Principal Secretary of State for the Colonies. The Committee further advise that.a copy hereof be also forwarded to the High Commissioner for Canada in London, with instructions to him to personally press upon the Secretary of State for the Colonies the urgent, necessity for obtaining from the Government of the United States satisfactory assurances upon this subject. All which is respectfully submitted for your Excellency's approval. (Signed) JOHN J. McGEE, Clerk, Privy Council. No. 373. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. (Telegraphic.) Foreign Office, June 26, 1890. THE proposal made in your telegram of yesterday has my entire concurrence. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Substance telegraphed, July 3.) My Lord> Washington, July 1, 1890. I HAVE the honour to transmit a copy of a note which I received yesterday evening from Mr. Blaine, in answer to your Lordship's despatch of the 22nd May, of which I left a copy in his hands on the 5th ultimo. In this note Mr. Blaine endeavours to show that the negotiations which preceded the conclusion of the Treaty of 1824 between tbe United States and Russia, and the Treaty of 1S25-between Great Britain and Russia, had, so far as respects- maritime jurisdiction, no reference whatever to the Behring's Sea, but only to the Pacific Ocean south of the Aleutian Islands, and, therefore, that the United States' Government have not laid themselves open to the charge of asserting rights in the Behring's Sea which they disputed as against Russia, before the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867. While repudiating any claim to the Behring's Sea as a mare clausum, Mr. Blaine insists that the claim of Russia to exclusive jurisdiction within 100 miles from land was not disputed as regards the Behring's Sea, but, on the contrary, was acquiesced in both by Great Britain and the United States at the time of the Treaties above referred to, and that it is only since the rights of Russia in Alaska and the Behring's Sea passed to the United States by purchase in 1867 that Great Britain has sought to challenge rights which she respected when Alaska was a Russian province. I have, &c. (Signed) JULTAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 374. Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Department of State, Washington, June 30, 1890. ON the 5th instant you read to me a despatch from Lord Salisburj', dated the 22nd May, and by his instruction you left with me a copy. His Lordship writes in lanswer to my despatch of the 22nd January last. At that time, writing to yourself touching the current contention between the Governments of the United States and Great Britain as to the jurisdiction of the former over the waters of the Behring's Sea, I made the following statement:— " The Government of the United States has no occasion and no desire to withdraw or modify the positions which it has at any time maintained against the claims of the Imperial Government of Russia. The United States will not withhold from any nation the privileges which it demanded for itself when Alaska was part of the Russian Empire. Nor is the Government of the United States disposed to exercise any less power or authority than it was willing to concede to the Imperial Government of Russia when its sovereignty extended over the territory in question. The President is persuaded that all friendly nations will concede to the United States the same rights and privileges on the lands and in the waters of Alaska which the same friendly nations always conceded to the Empire of Russia." In answer to this declaration, Lord Salisbury contends that Mr. John Quincy Adams, when Secretary of State under President Monroe, protested against the jurisdiction which Russia claimed over the waters of the Behring's Sea. To maintain this position his Lordship cites the words of a despatch of Mr. Adams, written on the 23rd July, 1823, to Mr. Henry Middleton, at that time our Minister at St. Petersburgh. The alleged declarations and admissions of Mr. Adams in that despatch have been the basis of all the arguments which Her Majesty's Government have submitted against the ownership of certain properties in the Behring's Sea which the Government of the United States confidently assumes. I quote the portion of Lord Salisbury's argument which includes the quotation from Mr. Adams:— | After Russia, at the instance of the Russian American Fur Company, claimed in 1821 the pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude, and not only prohibited all foreign vessels from landing on the coasts and islands of the above waters, but also prevented them from approaching [128] 3 S 498 within 100 miles thereof, Mr. Quincy Adams wrote as follows to the United States' Minister in Russia:— " The United States can admit no part of these claims j their right of navigation and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary .exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions." The quotation which Lord Salisbury makes- is unfortunately a most defective, erroneous, and misleading one. The conclusion is separated from the premise, a comma is turned into a period, an important qualification as to time is entirely erased, without even a suggestion that it had ever formed part of the text, and out of eighty-four words, logically and inseparably connected, thirty-five are dropped from Mr. Adams' paragraph in Lord Salisbury's quotation. No edition of Mr. Adams' work gives authority for his Lordship's quotation; while the archives of this Department plainly disclose its many errors. I requote Lord Salisbury's version of what Mr. Adams said, and in juxtaposition produce Mr. Adams' full text as he wrote it. (Lord Salisbury's quotation from Mr. Adams.) I The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation and fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions." '■ ';.■ (Full text of Mr. Adams' paragraph.) " The United States can admit no part of these claims; their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions, which, so far as Russian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude, and have no existence on the Continent of America." The words in italics are those which are left out of Mr. Adams' paragraph in the despatch of Lord Salisbury. They are precisely the words upon which the Government of the United States founds its argument in this case. Conclusions or inferences resting upon the paragraph, with the material parts of Mr. Adams' text omitted, are of course valueless. The first object is to ascertain the true meaning of Mr. Adams' words which were omitted by Lord Salisbury. "Russian rights," said Mr. Adams, " are confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude." The islands referred to are as easily recognized to-day as when Mr. Adams described their situation sixty-seven years ago. The best known among them, both under Russian and American jurisdiction, are Sitka and Kadiak, but their whole number is great. If Mr. Adams literally intended to confine Russian rights to those islands, all the discoveries of Vitus Behring and other great navigators are brushed away by one sweep of his pen, and a large chapter of history is but a fable. But Mr. Adams goes still further. He declares that "Russian rights have no existence on the Continent of America." If we take the words of Mr. Adams with their literal meaning there was no such thing as " Russian possessions in America," although forty-four years after Mr. Adams wrote these words the United States paid Russia 7,200,000 dollars fcr these "possessions," and all the rights of land and sea connected therewith. This construction of Mr. Adams' language cannot be the true one. It would be absurd on its face. The title to that far northern territory was secure to Russia as early as 1741 ; secure to her against the claims of all other nations; secure to her thirty-seven years before Captain Cook had sailed into the North Pacific; secure to her more than half-a-century before the United States had made good her title to Oregon. Russia was in point of time the first Power in this region by right of discovery. Without immoderate presumption she might have challenged the rights of others to assume territorial possessions, but no nation had shadow of cause or right to challenge her title to the vast region of land and water which, before Mr. Adams was Secretary of State, had become known as the " Russian possessions." 4$9 jgpE Mr*--. Adams' meanirig wa'sr not, therefore; and indeed could not be, what Lord Salisbury assumed. As against such interpretation, I shall endeavour to call his Lorda ship's attention to wimt this Government holds to be the indisputable meahing'bl Mr. Adams' entire paragraph. To that end a brief review of certain public transactions and a brief record of certain facts will be necessary. At the close of the year 1799 the Emperor Paul, by a Ukase, asserted the exclusive authority of Russia over the territory from the Behring's Strait down to the 55th degree of north latitude on the American coast, following westward "by the' Aleutian, Kurile, and other islands," practically inclosing the Behring's Sea. To the Russian American Company, which was organized under this Ukase, the Emperor gave the right " to make new discoveries " in that almost unknown region, and " to occupy the new land discovered" as " Russian possessions." The Emperor was assassinated before any new discoveries were announced; but his successor, the Emperor Alexander I,' inherited the ambition and the purpose of his father, and in a new Ukase of the 4th September, 1821, asserted the exclusive authority of Russia from Behring's .Straits' southward to the 51st degree of north latitude on the American coast, proclaiming his authority at the same time on the Asiatic coast as far south as the 45th degree, and" forbidding any vessel to approach within 100 miles of land on either continent. I quote the two sections of the Ukase that contain the order and the punishment:— " Section 1. The transaction of commerce and the pursuit of whaling and fishing of any other industry on the islands in the harbours and inlets, and, in general, all along the north-western coast of America from Behring's Strait to the 51st parallel of northern latitude, and likewise on the Aleutian Islands and along the eastern coast of Siberia and on the Kurile Islands, that is from Behring's Strait to the southern promontory of the Island of Urup, viz., as far south as latitude 45° 50' north, are exclusively reserved to subjects of the Russian Empire. . " Section 2. Accordingly, no foreign vessel shall be allowed either to put to shore at any of the. coasts and islands under Russian dominion, as specified in the preceding section, or even to approach the same to within a distance of less than 100 Italian' miles. Any vessel contravening this provision shall be subject to confiscation with her whole cargo." Against this larger claim of authority (viz., extending farther south on the American- coast to the 51st degree of north latitude) Mr. Adams vigorously protested. In a despatch of the 30th March, 1822, to M. Poletica, the Russian Minister at Washington, Mr. Adams said :— "This Ukase now for the first time extends the claim of Russia on the north-west' coast of America to the 51st degree of north latitude." And he pointed out to the Russian Minister that the only foundation for the new pretension of Russia was the existence of a small Settlement, situated, not on the American Continent, but on a small island in latitude 57°—Novo Archangelsk, now known as Sitka. Mr.' Adams protested, not against the Ukase of Paul, but against the Ukase of Alexander; not wholly against the Ukase of Alexander, but only against his extended claim of sovereignty southward on the continent to the 51st degree north latitude. In short, Mr. Adams protested, not against the old possessions, but against the new pretensions of Russia on the north-west coast of America—pretensions to territory claimed by the United States, and frequented by her mariners since the peace of 1783, a specification of time which is dropped from Lord Salisbury's quotation from Mr. Adams, but which Mr. Adams pointedly used to fix the date when the power of the United States 'was visibly exercised on the coast of the Pacific Ocean. The names and phrases at that time in use to describe the geography included within the area of this dispute are confusing, and, at certain points, apparently contradictory and irreconcilable. Mr. Adams' denial to Russia of the ownership of territory on the I Continent of America " is a fair illustration of this singular contradiction of names and places. In the same way the phrase " north-west coast" will be found, beyond all possible doubt, to have been used in two senses : one including the north-west coast of the Russian possessions, and one to describe the coast whose northern limit is the 60th parallel of north latitude. It is very plain that Mr. Adams' phrase "the Continent of America," in his reference to Russia's possessions, was used in a territorial sense, and not in a geographical sense; he was drawing the distinction between the territory of "America" and the territory of the "Russian possessions." Mr. Adams did not intend to assert that these territorial rights of Russia had no existence on the Continent of North America. He meant that they did not exist as the Ukase of the Emperor Alexander had attempted to [128]' .• 3 S 2 500 11 mi ||i establish them, southward of the Aleutian Peninsula, and on that distinctive part of the continent claimed as the territory of the United States. " America " and the " United States " were then, as they are now, commonly used as synonymous. British statesmen at that time used the phrase precisely as Mr. Adams did. The possessions of the Crown were genetically termed 1 British America." Great Britain and the United States harmonized at this point, and on this territorial issue, against Russia. Whatever disputes might be left by these negotiations for subsequent settlement between the two Powers, there can be no doubt that at that time they had a common and very strong interest against the territorial aggrandizement of Russia. The British use of the phrase is clearly seen in the Treaty between Great Britain and Russia negotiated in 1825, and referred to at length in a subsequent portion of this despatch. A publicist as eminent as Stratford Canning opened the IHrd Article of that Treaty in these descriptive words: | The line of demarcation between the possessions of the High Contracting Parties, upon the coasts of the continent, and the Islands of America to the north-west." Mr. Canning evidently distinguished " the islands of America " from " the islands of the Russian possessions," which were far more numerous, aud by the use of the phrase "to the north-west," just as evidently limited the coast of the continent as Mr. Adam& limited it in that direction by the Alaskan Peninsula. A concurrence of opinion between John Quincy Adams and Stratford Canning touching any public question left little room even for suggestion by a third person. It will be observed, as having weighty significance, that the Russian ownership of the Aleutian and Kurile Islands (which border and close in the Behring's Sea, and by the dip of the peninsula are several degrees south of latitude 55°) was not disputed by Mr. Adams, and could not possibly have been referred to by him when he was limiting- the "island" possessions of Russia. This is but another evidence that Mr. Adams was making no question as to Russia's ownership of all territory bordering on the Behring's Sea. The contest pertained wholly to the territory on the north-west coast. The Emperor Paul's Ukase, including his sovereignty over the Aleutian and Kurile Islands, was never questioned or denied by any Power at any time. Many of the acts of Mr. Adams' public life received interesting commentary, and, where there was doubt, luminous interpretation in his personal diary, which was carefully kept from the 3rd June, 1794, to the 1st January, 1848, inclusive. The present case affords a happy illustration of the corroborative strength of the diary. During the progress of this correspondence Baron Tuyl, who had succeeded M. Poletica as Russian Minister in Washington, called upon Mr. Adams at his office, on the 17th July, 1823, six days before the date of the despatch upon which 1 have been commenting, and upon which Lord Salisbury relies for sustaining his contention in regard to the Behring's Sea. During an animated conversation of an hour or more between Mr. Adams and Baron Tuyl, the former said :— " I told Baron Tuyl specially that we should contest the right of Russia to any territorial establishment on this continent . . ." It will be observed that Mr. Adams uses the same phrase in his conversation that has misled English statesmen as to the true scope and meaning of his despatch of the 28rd July, 1823. When he declared that we should " contest the right of Russia to any territorial establishment on this continent " (with the word "any" italicized), he no more meant that we should attempt to drive Russia from her ancient possessions than that we should attempt to drive England from the ownership of Canada or Nova Scotia. Such talk would have been absurd gasconade, and Mr. Adams was the last man to indulge in it. His true meaning, it will be seen, comes out in the next sentence, when he declares:— " I told Baron Tuyl that we should assume distinctly the principle that the American continents are no longer subjects for any new European colonial establishments." In the Message of President Monroe to the next Congress (the eighteenth") at its first Session, the 2nd December, 1823, he announced that, at the proposal of the Russian Government, the United States had agreed to § arrange, by amicable negotiations, the respective rights and interests of the two nations on the north-west coast of this continent." A similar proposal had been made by Russia to Great Britain, and had been likewise agreed to. The negotiations in both cases were to be at St. Petersburgh. It was in connection with this subject, and in the same paragraph, that President Monroe spoke thus:— " In the discussions to which this interest has given rise, and in the arrangements by which they may terminate, the occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the United States are involved, that the American Continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and 501 maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European Power." This very brief declaration (in fact, merely the three lines italicized) constitutes the famous " Monroe doctrine." Mr. Adams' words of the July preceding clearly tore- shadowed this position as the permanent policy of the United States. The declaration removes the last doubt, if room for doubt had been left, that the reference made by Mr. Adams was to the future, and had no possible connection with the Russian rights existing for three-quarters of a century before the despatch of 1823 was written. It was evident from the first that the determined attitude of the United States, subsequently supported by Great Britain, would prevent the extension of Russian territory southward to the 51st parallel. The Treaties which were the result of the meeting at St. Petersburgh, already noted, marked the surrender on the part of Russia of this pretension, and the conclusion was a joint Agreement that 50° 40' should be taken as the extreme southern boundary of Russia on the north-west coast instead of the 55th degree which was proclaimed by the Emperor Paul in the Ukase of 1799. The Treaty between Russia and the United States was concluded on the 17th April, 1824, and that between Russia and Great Britain ten months later, on the 16th February, 1825. In both Treaties Russia acknowledged 54° 40' as the dividing line. It was not determined which of the two nations owned the territory from 54° 40' down to the 49th parallel, and it remained in dispute between Great Britain and the United States until its final adjustment by tbe "Oregon Treaty" negotiated by Mr. Buchanan and Mr. Pakenham under the Administration of Mr. Polk in 1846. The Government of the United States has steadily maintained that in neither of these Treaties with Russia was there any attempt at regulating or controlling or even asserting an interest in the Russian possessions and the Behring's Sea which lie far to the north and west of the territory which formed the basis of the contention. This conclusion is indisputably proved by the Protocols which were signed during the progress of the negotiation. At the fourth conference of the Plenipotentiaries on the 8th March, 1824, the American Minister, Mr. Henry Middleton, submitted to the Russian Representative, Count Nesselrode, the following:—• " The dominion cannot be acquired but by a real occupation and possession, and an intention (' animus ') to establish it is by no means sufficient." Now, it is clear, according to the facts established, that neither Russia nor any other Power has the right of dominion upon the Continent of America between the 50th and 60th degrees of north latitude. Still less has she the dominion of the adjacent maritime territory, or of the sea which washes these coasts, a dominion which is only accessory to the territorial dominion. Therefore, she has not the right of exclusion or of admission on these coasts, nor in these seas, wliich are free seas. The right of navigating all the free seas belongs, by natural law, to every independent nation, and even constitutes an essential part of this independence. The United States have exercised navigation in the seas and commerce upon the coasts above mentioned from the time of their independence; and they have a perfect right to this navigation and to this commerce, and they can only be deprived of it by their own act or a Convention. This is a clear proof of what is demonstrated in other ways, that the whole dispute between the United States and Russia, and between Great Britain and Russia, related to the north-west coast, as Mr. Middleton expresses it, between the " 50th and the 60th degrees of north latitude." This statement is in perfect harmony with Mr. Adams' paragraph when given in full. "The United States," Mr. Middleton insists, "have exercised navigation in the seas and commerce upon the coasts above mentioned from the time of their independence;" but he does not say one word in regard to our possessing any rights of navigation or commerce in the Behring's Sea. He declares that Russia has not the right of exclusion or admission on these coasts (between the 50th and the 60th degrees north latitude) nor in these seas, which are/ree seas, evidently emphasizing I free " to distinguish those seas from the Behring's Sea, which was recognized as being under Russian restrictions. Mr. Middleton wisely and conclusively maintained that if Russia had no claim to the continent between the 50th and 60th degrees north latitude, " still less could she have the dominion of the adjacent maritime territory," or, to make it more specific, " of the sea which washes these coasts." That sea was the Great Ocean, or the South Sea, or the Pacific Ocean, the three names being equally used for the same thing. The language of Mr. Middleton plainly shows that the lines of latitude were usei 502 navigation and of fishing simply.to indicate the " dominion" on the coast between the 50th and 60th parallels of north latitude. The important declarations of Mr. Middleton which interpret and enforce the contention of the United States should be regarded as indisputable authority, from the fact that they are but a paraphrase of tbe instructions which Mr. Adams delivered to him for his guidance in negotiating the Treaty with Count Nesselrode. Beyond all doubt, they prove that Mr. Adams' meaning was the reverse of what Lord Salisbury infers it to be in the paragraph of which he quoted only a part. The four principal Articles of the Treaty negotiated by Mr. Middleton are as follows:— " Article I. It is agreed that in any part of the Great Ocean, commonly called the Pacific Ocean or South Sea, the respective citizens or subjects of the High Contracting Powers shall be neither disturbed nor restrained, either in navigation or in fishing, or in the power of resorting to the coasts, upon points which may not already have been occupied, for the purpose of trading with the natives, saving always the restrictions and conditions determined by the following Articles. "Article II. With a view of preventing the rights of exercised upon the Great Ocean by the citizens and subjects of the High Contracting Powers from becoming the pretext for an illicit trade, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not resort to any point where there is a Russian establishment without the permission of the Governor or Commander; and that, reciprocally, the subjects of Russia shall not resort without permission to any establishment of the United States upon the north-west coast. " Article III. It is moreover agreed that, hereafter, there shall not be 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 54° 40' of north latitude; and that in the same manner there shall be none formed by Russian subjects, or under the authority of Russia, south of the same parallel. " Article 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 citizents 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 1st Article, by carefully mentioning the Great Ocean, and describing it as the ocean "commonly called .the Pacific Ocean or South Sea," evidently meant to distinguish it from some other body of water with which the negotiators did not wish to confuse it. Mr. Adams used the term "South Sea" in the despatch quoted by Lord Salisbury, and used it with the same discriminating knowledge that pervades his whole argument on this question. If no other body of water existed within the possible scope of the Treaty, such particularity of description would have had no logical meaning. But there was another body of water already known as the Behring's Sea. That name was first given to it in 1817, according to English authority, seven years before the American Treaty, and eight years before the British Treaty with Russia; but it had been known as a sea, separate from the ocean, under the names of the Sea of Kamtchatka, the Sea of Otters, or the Aleutian Sea, at different periods before the Emperor Paul issued his Ukase of 1799. The Hnd Article plainly shows that the Treaty is limited to the Great Ocean, as separate from Behring's Sea, because the limitation of tbe " north-west coast " between the 50th and 60th degrees could apply to no other. That coast, as defined both by American and British negotiators at that time; did not border on the Behring's Sea. The Hlrd Article shows the compromise as to territorial sovereignty on the northwest coast. The United States and Great Britain had both claimed that Russia's just boundary on the coast terminated at the 60th degree north latitude, the southern border of the Aleutian Peninsula. Russia claimed to the 51st parallel. They made a compromise by a nearly equal division. An exactly equal division would have given Russia 54° 30'; but 10 miles farther north, Prince of Wales' Island, presented a better geographical point for division, and Russia accepted a little less than half the coast of which she had claimed all, and 54° 40' was thus established as the dividing- point. The IVth Article of the Treaty necessarily grew out of the claims of Russia to a, share of the north-west coast in dispute between the United States.and Great Britain.: Mr. Adams, in the instruction to Mr. Middleton so often referred to, says:— £03 c . j "By thelllrd Article of the Convention 'between : the United. States and Great •Britain of the 20th October, 1818, it was agreed that any country that might be claimed by either party, on the. north-west coast of .America, westward of the Stony Mountains, should, together with its harbours, bays, and creeks, and the navigation of all rivers within the same, be free and open, for the term of ten years from that date, to the vessels, citizens, and subjects of the two Powers, without prejudice to the claims of either party .or of any other State. " You are authorized to propose an Article of the same purport for a term of ten years from the signature of a joint Convention between the United States, Great Britain, and .ussia. It will be observed that the IVth Article relates solely to the " north-west coast of America," so well understood as the coast of the Pacific Ocean between the 50th and the '60th degrees north latitude, and, therefore, does not in the remotest degree touch the Behring's Sea or the land bordering upon it. The several Articles in the Treaty between Great Britain and Russia, 16th February, 1825, that could have any bearing on the pending contention are as follows:— Articles I and II. (Substantially the same as in the Treaty between Russia and the United States.) "Article III. 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 point of the island called Prince of Wales' Island, which point lies in the parallel of 54° 40' north latitude, and between the 131st 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 56th degree of north latitude; from this last-mentioned point the line of demarcation shall follow the summit of the mountains situated parallel to tbe coast as far as the point of intersection of the 141st degree of west longitude (of the same meridian); and, finally, from the said point of intersection the said meridian line of the 141st degree, in its prolongation as far as the Frozen Ocean, shall form the limit between the Russian and British possessions on the Continent of America to the north-west. Article V. (Substantially the same as Article III of the Treaty between Russia and the United States.) " Article VI. It is understood that the 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 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 purpose of fishing and of trading with the natives." 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 differences 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 of 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 as the point of intersection of the 14<lst degree of west longitude." Article IV, qualifying Article III, specifies 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 141st degree of west longitude, shall prove to be at a 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 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 504 ■• longitude. From that point the 141st degree of west longitude, as far as it extend continuously on land northward, is taken as the boundary between the territories 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. Elias. By this Agreement Great Britain was excluded from all. rivers emptying into the Behring's Sea, including the Great Tukon and its affluent the Porcupine, which rise, and for a long distance flow, in British America. So complete was the exclusion from Behring's Sea that Great Britain surrendered in this case a 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's Sea as to forego following her own river to its mouth in that sea. It shows a curious association of political events that in the Washington Treaty of 1871 the United States conceded to Great Britain the privilege of navigating the Tukon and its branch the Porcupine to the Behring's Sea in exchange for certain privileges conceded to the United States on the St. Lawrence. The request of Great Britain for the privilege of navigating the Tukon and the Porcupine is a suggestive confession that it was withheld from her by Russia in the Treaty of 1825, withheld because the rivers flowed to the Behring's Sea. The Vllth Article is practically a repetition of tbe IVth Article in the Treaty between Russia and the United States, 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 A merica or to reach the coast from British America. They are excluded from going north of the prescribed point on the coast near Mount St. Elias, and are therefore kept out of Behring's Sea. It is to be noted that the negotiators of this Treaty in defining the boundary between the Russian and British possessions cease to observe particularity exactly at the point on the coast where it is intersected by the 60th parallel. From that point the boundary is designated by the almost indefinite prolongation northward ot the 141st degree of longitude west. It is plain, therefore, that -this Treaty, like the Russo- American Treaty, limited the "north-west coast" to that part of the coast between the 50th 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's Sea, whether on continent or island, 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. It must not be forgotten that this entire negotiation of the three Powers proceeded with full knowledge and recognition of the Ukase of 1821. While all questions touching the lespective rights of the Powers on the north-west coast between the 50th and 00th parallels were discussed and pressed by one side or the other, and finally agreed upon, the terms of the Ukase of 1821, in which the Emperor set forth so clearly the rights claimed and exercised by Russia in the Behring's Sea, were untouched and unquestioned. These rights were therefore admitted by all the Powers negotiating as within the exercise of Russia's lawful authority then, and they were left inviolate by England during all tbe subsequent continuance of Russia's dominion over Alaska. These Treaties were therefore a practical renunciation, both on the part of England and the United States, of any rights in the waters of Behring's Sea during the period of Russia's sovereignty. They left the Behring's Sea, and all its coasts .and islands, precisely as the Ukase of Alexander in 18"21 left them—that is, with the prohibition against any vessel approaching nearer to the coast than 100 Italian miles under dangir of confiscation. The original Ukase of Alexander of 1821 claimed as far south as trie 61st degree of north latitude, with the inhibition of 100 miles from the coast applying to the whole. The result of the protest of Mr. Adams, followed by the co-operation of Great- Britain, was to force Russia back to 54° 40' as her southern boundary. But there was no renunciation whatever on the part of Russia as to the Behring's Sea, to which the Ukase especially and primarily applied. As a piece of legislation this Ukase was as authoritative in the dominions of Russia as an Act of Parliament is in the dominions of Great Britain or any Act of Congress in the territory of the United States. Except as voluntarily modified by Russia in the Treaty with the United States, 17th April, 1824, and in the Treaty with Great Britain, 16th February, 1825, the Ukase £05" of 1821 stood as the law controlling the Russian possessions in America until the close of Russia's ownership by transfer to this Government. Both the United States and Great Britain recognized it, respected it, obeyed it. It did not, as so many suppose, declare the Behring's Sea to be mare clausum.. It did declare that the waters, to the extent of 100 miles from the shores, were reserved for tbe subjects of the Russian Empire. Of course, many hundred miles east and west and north and south were thus intentionally left by Russia for the whale fishery, and for fishing open and free to the world, of which other nations took large advantage. . Perhaps, in pursuing this advantage, foreigners did not always keep 100 miles from the shore; but the theory of right on which they conducted their business unmolested was that they observed the conditions of the Ukase. But the 100-mile restriction performed the function for which it was specially designed in preventing foreign nations from molesting, disturbing, or by any possibility sharing in the fur trade. The fur trade formed the principal, almost the sole, employment of the Russian American Company.' It formed its employment, indeed, to such a degree that it soon became known only as the Russian American Fur Company, and quite suggestively that name is given to the Company by Lord Salisbury in the despatch to which I am replying. While, therefore, there may have been a large amount of lawful whaling and fishing in the Behring's Sea, the taking of furs by foreigners was always and under all circumstances illicit. Eighteen years after the Treaty of 1825 (in 1843) Great Britain made a Commercial Treaty with Russia based on the principle of reciprocity of advantages, but the rights of the Russian American Company, which under both Ukases included the sovereignty over the sea to the extent of 100 miles from the shores, were reserved by special clause in a separate and special Article signed after the principal Articles of the Treaty had been concluded and signed. Although British rights were enlarged with nearly all other parts of the Russian Empire, her relations with the Russian possessions and with the Behring's, Sea remained at precisely the same point where the Treaty of 1825 had placed them. Again, in 1859, Great Britain still further enlarged her commercial relations with the Emperor of Russia, and again the " possessions" and the Behring's Sea were held firmly in their relations to the Russian American Company as they had been held in the Treaty of 1843. It is especially notable that, both in the Treaty of 1S43 and the Treaty of 1859, it is declared that " in regard to commerce and navigation in the Russian possessions on the north-west coast of America the Convention concluded at St. Petersburgh, 16th February, 1825, shall continue in force." The same distinction and the same restrictions which Mr. Adams made in regard to the north-west coast of America were still observed, and Great Britain's access from or to the interior of the continent was still limited to that part of the coast between 54° 40' and a point near Mount St. Elias. The language of the three Russo-British Treaties of 1825, 1843, and 1859 corresponds with that employed in Mr. Adams' despatch to Mr. Middleton to which reference has so frequently been made. This shows that the true meaning of Mr. Adams' paragraph is the key, and indeed the only key, by which the Treaties can be correctly interpreted, and by which expressions apparently contradictory or unintelligible can be readily harmonized. Immediately following the partial quotation of Mr. Adams' despatch, Lord Salisbury quotes the case of the United States' brig " Loriot" as having some bearing on the question relating to the Behring's Sea. The case happened on the 15th September, 1836, and Mr. Forsyth, Secretary of State, in a despatch to the United States' Minister at St. Petersburgh, declared the course of the Russians in arresting the vessel to be a violation of the rights of the citizens of the United States; he claimed that the citizens of the United States had the right immemorially, as well as by the stipulations of the Treaty of 1824, to fish in those waters. Lord Salisbury's understanding of the case differs entirely from that held by the Government of the United States. The "Loriot" was not arrested in the Behring's Sea at all, nor was she engaged in taking furs. She was arrested, as Mr. Forsyth in his despatch says, in iatitude 54° 55', more than 60 miles south of Sitka, on the "north-west coast," to which, and to. which only, the Treaty of 1824 referred. Russia upheld its action on the ground that the ten-year term provided in the IVth Article of the Treaty had closed two years before. The case was made the basis of an application on the part of the United States' Government for a renewal of that Article. This application was pressed for several years, but finally and absolutely refused by the Russian Government. Under the claim of Russia that the term of ten years had expired, the United States failed to secure any redress in the | Loriot" case. With all due respect to Lord (1281 3 T 506 :'■ Salisbury's judgment, the case of the " Loriot" sustains the entire correctness of the position of the United States in this contention. It only remains to say that whatever duty Great Britain owred to Alaska as a Russian province, whatever she agreed to do, or to tefrain from doing, touching Alaska and the Behring's Sea, was not changed by the mere fact of the transfer of sovereignty to the United States. It was explicitly declared in the Vlth Article of the Treaty by which the territory was ceded by Russia, that " the cession hereby made conveys all the rights, franchises, and privileges now belonging to Russia in the said territory or dominions, and appurtenances thereto." Neither by the Treaty with Russia of 1825, nor by its renewal in 1843, nor by its second renewal in 1859, did Great Britain gain any right to take seals in Behring's Sea. In fact, those Treaties were a prohibition upon her which she steadily respected so long as Alaska was a Russian province. It is for Great Britain now to show by what law she gained rights in that sea after the transfer of its sovereignty to the United States. During all the time elapsing between the Treaty of 1825 and the cession of Alaska to the United States in 1867, Great Britain never affirmed the right of her subjects to capture fur-seal in the Behring's Sea; and, as a matter of fact, her subjects did not during that long period attempt to catch seals in the Behring's Sea. Lord Salisbury, in replying to my assertion that these lawless intrusions upon the fur-seal fisheries began in 1886, declares that they had occurred before. He points out one attempt in 1870, in which forty-seven skins were found on board an intruding vessel; in 1872 there was a rumour that expeditions were about to fit out in Australia and Victoria for the purpose of taking seal in the Behring's Sea; in 1874 some reports were heard that vessels had entered the sea for that purpose ; one case was reported in 1875, two cases in 1884, two also in 1885. These cases, I may say, without intending disrespect to his Lordship, prove the truth of the statement which he endeavours to controvert; because they form just a sufficient number of exceptions to establish the fact that the destructive intrusion began in 1886. But I refer to them now for the purpose of showing that his Lordship does not attempt to cite the intrusion of a single British sealer into the Behring's Sea until after Alaska had been transferred to the United States. I am justified, therefore, in repeating the questions I addressed to Her Majesty's Government on the 22nd of last January, and which still remain unanswered, viz.:— " Whence did the ships of Canada derive the right to do in 1886 that which they had refrained from doing for nearly ninety years ? " Upon what grounds did Her Majesty's Government defend in the year 1886 a course of conduct in the Behring's Sea which had been carefully avoided ever since the discovery of that sea ? "By what reasoning did Her Majesty's Government conclude that an act may be committed with impunity against- the rights of the United States which had never been attempted against the same rights when held by the Russian Empire ?" I have, &c. (Signed) JAMES G. BLAINE. No. 375. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 3.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, July 3, 1890. I HAD a long interview with Mi'. Blaine yesterday. He said that his health necessitated his departure, and that he had decided to leave for Bar Harbour to-day. Alluding to the Behring's Sea question, he said that it was too late now to make any arrangement which would affect the present fishery season, but that he was prepared to continue the negotiations with me from Bar Harbour, as I should probably soon be in the neighbourhood. No. 376. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 7.) My Lord, Washington, June 18, 1890. 1 HAVE the honour to report that on Saturday, the 14th instant, as instructed in your Lordship's telegram of the 11th instant, I addressed to the United States' Secretary 507 . of State the Protest against any further interference with British sealers in Behring's Sea, the draft of which was inclosed in your Lordship's despatch of the 29th ultimo. I have the honour to inclose herewith copy of the Protest as delivered, together with copy of the covering note to Mr. Blaine. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. ' Inclosure 1 in No. 376. Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Sir, - Washington, June 14, 1890. WITH reference to the note which I had the honour to address to you on the 11th instant, I desire to express to you my deep regret at having failed up to the present time to obtain from you the assurance which I had hoped to receive, that during the continuance of our negotiations for the settlement of the Fur-seal Fishery question, British sealing-vessels would not be interfered with by United States' Revenue cruizers on the Behring's Sea outside of territorial waters. Having learnt from statements in the public press and from other sources that the Revenue-cruizers " Rush" and | Corwin" are now abont to be dispatched to the Behring's Sea, I cannot, consistently with the instructions I have received from my Government, any longer defer the communication of their formal Protest, announced in my notes of the 23rd ultimo and tbe 11th instant, against any such interference with British vessels. I have accordingly the honour to transmit the same herewith. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure 2 in No. 376. Protest. THE Undersigned, Her Britannic Majesty's Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary to the United States of America, has the honour, by instructions of his Government, to make to the Honourable J. G. Blaine, Secretary of State of the United States, the following communication:— Her Britannic Majesty's Government have learnt with great concern, from notices which have appeared in the press, and the general accuracy of which has been confirmed by Mr. Blaine's statements to the Undersigned, that the Government of the United States have issued instructions to their Revenue cruizers about to be dispatched to Behring's Sea, under which the vessels of British subjects will again be exposed, in the prosecution high seas, to unlawful interference at the bands of ne of their legitimate industry on American officers. Her Britannic Majesty's Government are anxious to co-operate to the fullest extent of their power with the Government of the United States in such measures as may be found to be expedient for the protection of the seal fisheries. They are at the present moment engaged in examining, in concert with the Government of the United States, the best method of arriving at an agreement upon this point. But they cannot admit the right of the United States of their own sole motion to restrict for this purpose the freedom of Behring's Sea, which the United States have themselves in former years convincingly and successfully vindicated, nor to enforce their municipal legislation against British vessels.on the high seas beyond the limits of their territorial jurisdiction. ! Her Britannic Majesty's Government are therefore unable to pass over without notice the public announcement of an intention on the part of the Government of the United States to renew the acts of interference with British vessels navigating outside the territorial waters of the United States, of which they have previously had to complain. The Undersigned is in consequence instructed formally to protest against such interference, and to declare that Her Britannic Majestv's Government must hold the [128] 3 T 2 ii 508 Government of the United States responsible for the consequences which may ensue from acts which are contrary to the principles of international law. The Undersigned has the honour to renew to Mr. Blaine the assurances of his highest consideration. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 377. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 7.) « My Lord, Washington, June 27, 1890. I HAVE the honour to transmit herewith a remarkable article on the subject of the Behring's Sea negotiations which appeared in the "New Tork Herald" of yesterday. E have Sec. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 377. Eztractfrom the "New York Herald" of June 26, 1890. (From our regular Correspondent.) | Herald " Bureau, corner of Fifteenth and G Streets, N. W., Washington, June 25, 1890. THE story of a recent interference by the President with the conduct and progress of the Behring's Sea negotiations has been circulating confidentially in Washington for several weeks. Its publication now, after the interposition of the President had ceased and the mischief threatened by it had passed away, is regarded in some quarters as a counter-attack on Mr. Blaine for his alleged Tariff heresy. The following is a plain statement of the facts of the Behring's Sea episode, obtained from an authoritative source. It shows that, as soon as the President saw the consequences of his well-meant intention, and that he had separated himself in some degree from Mr. Blaine, he hastened to reunite himself to the Secretary and to strengthen the latter's position to the fullest extent as against adverse influences in the Administration. Steps in Diplomacy. The oral discussion of the Behring's Sea question began between Secretary Blaine and Minister Pauncefote last January. The Secretary advanced and the Minister combated the claim of a territorial jurisdiction by the United States over all that part of Behring's Sea lying east and south of the boundary-line drawn through Behring's Strait and across the sea by the Treaty with Russia for the cession of Alaska to this country. Without coming to a head the discussion was laid aside by mutual consent and without prejudice to the position of either party, for the reason that the British Representative admitted that his Government was not only willing, but desirous, on grounds of good neighbourhood and of a mutual interest, to enter into an arrangement that would efficiently protect the seals resorting to Behring's Sea from injurious molestation or slaughter. As these were the very and the only objects for which the United States' Government was desirous to establish its claim to a territorial jurisdiction in the waters of the sea, it was agreed to shift the discussion to the project of an international regulation of seal-catching wherein a prohibition of marine sealing during the annual breeding season should form a leading position. Russia, being a necessary party to such an arrangement, and having an identical interest with that of the United States as the owner of seal- rookeries in Behring's Sea, was invited to take part in the new discussion, and did so through its Resident Envoy at Washington. Mr. Blaine, however, was not satisfied to rest wholly upon the British assurance that England was even something more than willing to assist the United States in taking due 8TsfBgfrw*-«l 509 care of its seal_ property. In preparing for his friendly and informal conferences with the British Minister he had taken, upon his notes, a suggestion to draw into discussion the question, in view of the peculiar habits of the fur-seal (which though nomadic during part of each year returned regularly and for a considerable period to its home within the United States), whether this Government might not lay claim to a right to extend a reasonable protection to the animal during its various movements in the waters surrounding its rookeries. This discussion he pressed upon the Minister, relying upon the well-established English doctrine of the "intention to return" to offset the legal argument that property in animals of a wild nature is limited to the period of possession. This second and independent claim to a police jurisdiction in Behring's Sea is still pending, and the arguments on both sides of it have been fully and formally stated, with the help of competent lawyers, and made matter of record, should it ever become necessary to revert to the claim. A Close Season. Up to the stage above indicated the negotiations had proceeded without obstruction. Not till the Plenipotentiaries came together to settle principal details of the agreed International Regulations did it appear that while the United States contemplated a close season in Behring's Sea covering the whole period of six months or more during which the seals were moving into and out of the sea and were reposing at the rookeries, Great Britain proposed simply such arrangements as would reasonably guard aga'inst an excessive catching of female seals, by which the perpetuity of the herd would be endangered. In lieu of a single and continuous close season, covering the whole time of the yearly presence of the seals in Behring's Sea, which was the project of the United States, the British proposal was of two short periods of closure, one during the inward and another during the outward movement of the seals, supplemented by a broad belt of isolation around the rookeries, which no sealmg-vessel was to penetrate. Mr. Blaine was confident that the Senate of the United States would not ratify such a Convention as the British Plenipotentiary proposed, nor Congress enact the legislation necessary to give it effect. Sir Julian was equally sure that neither the British nor the Canadian Parliament would legislate upon the broad lines laid.down by Mr. Blaine. Still both Plenipotentiaries were agreed upon the principle that there should be an effective regulation of the sealing industry, to be attained by mutual co-operation. The Russian proposition accorded with that of the United States, but the Russian Minister left it to our Government, as the larger proprietor of rookeries, to act for both. The real trouble lay in the statements and opinions of experts, upon which both negotiants necessarily had to rely. To settle the defects and conflicts of this so-called evidence, and to produce a satisfactory basis for a Convention and the legislation necessitated by it, a proposal was moved from the British side to assemble a Joint Technical Commission to examine, decide, and report what was actually necessary to carry out the well-settled intention of the parties. After a very careful and deliberate consideration of this proposal, in which the main question was studied in every possible aspect, Mr. Blaine gave his adhesion to it. At this point the new lessees of the Alaskan Seal Islands intervened. They were not willing to put at issue, in any manner of form, the question whether there should be any marine sealing in Behring's Sea, however restricted. To make a long story short, they prevailed, but not at the State Department. The control of the negotiations was taken from Mr. Blaine, and he was only permitted, as the organ of the Government, to reject the modus vivendi proposed by the British Government to carry the parties safely through the sealing season then close at hand, and report what he could learn or guess of the probable action or disposition of Lord Salisbury. The project of a Technical Commission was dropped clean out of sight. Ordered to use Force. The Revenue cutters were ordered to Behring's Sea, there to enforce within disputed waters the full vigour of a Law passed with a view to waters not in dispute, and the extension of which Law to the waters in dispute Congress had shrunk from as lately as 18S9, when the question of such an extension was squarely presented by a Bill which went into Conference and became a Law. Inquirers at the Treasury Department were informed that the sailing orders to the cutters meant all they said; that no secret or supplementary orders would issue in. favour of IJrjtish vessels, and that any such vessel linttl 510 sealing in Behring's Sea would be seized, relieved of its lading and papers, and be dismantled. Mr. Blaine knew that the original question at is'giie had broadened into the larger one of an exercise of the right of search in time of peace upon what, with considerable force of argument and weight of • authority, was "claimed to be a part of the high seas, and without the consent of the friendly Power whose vessels were to be subjected to an indignity which the United States had once to gone to war to- resent. What he knew the new conductors of the negotiations knew^hecessarily. But they scouted the idea that England would do more than protest, and they were not afraid of protestation. England protests. All at once it became known that LordoSalisbury meant to do the very thing he was expected not to do, and to protect by force, if necessary, British vessels and subjects in Behring's Sea. The situation was hastily reviewed, and the conclusion reached that, upon the record of the case as made since January last, the Government could not afford to go before the world, nor even before the press and people of the United States, with a defence of its contemplated policy of violence. The Revenue cutters were stopped at Puget Sound to await further orders. The negotiations were restored to the charge of the Secretary of State, who improvised a proposal designed to cover a retreat not necessitated by himself and to put the question back to a normal and proper situation. There will be no trouble in Behring's Sea. The claims of the United States have been preserved in full vigour, and before the opening of another sealing season a settlement will be reached honourable and advantageous to the United States. Arbitration expected. It is expected that within the next ten or twelve days the negotiations will be so far advanced that new sailing orders maybe issued to the "Rush" and " Corwin," which vessels will then resume their interrupted voyage to Behring's Sea, there to perform all the duties required by law, but not to exercise a disputed jurisdiction which it is the expectation of the Government to submit to the determination of some disinterested Power or Sovereign, possibly Pope Leo XIII, as intimated many months ago in these despatches. Mr. Blaine gave it as an excuse that he could not visit Chicago this week, when pressed to do so, because of the importance of the Behring's Sea negotiations now favourably progressing, as he said. No. 378. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 7.) My Lord, Washington, June 27, 1890. I HAVE the honour to transmit copy of a note which I addressed to Mr. Blaine immediately upon the receipt of your Lordship's telegram of the 26th instant. I trust that it will meet with your Lordship's approval. I have, &c. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. Inclosure in No. 378. Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. Si Washington, June 27, 1890. I DID not fail to transmit to the Marquis of Salisbury a copy of your note of the 11th instant, in which, with reference to his Lordship's statement, that British legislation would be necessary to enable Her Majesty's Government to exclude British vessels from any portion of the high seas, "even for an hour," you informed me, by desire of the President, that the United States' Government would be satisfied " if Lord Salisbury would, by public Proclamation, simply request'that vessels sailing under the British flag should abstain from entering the Behring's Sea during the present season." I have now the honour to inform you that I have been instructed by Lord Salisbury 51.1 to state to you, in reply, that the President's request presents constitutional difficulties which would preclude Her Majesty's Government from acceding to it, except as part of a general scheme for the settlement of the Behring's Sea controversy, and on certain conditions which would justify the assumption by Her Majesty's Government of the grave responsibility involved in the proposal. Those conditions are:— 1. That the two Governments agree forthwith to refer to arbitration the question of the legality of the action of the United States' Government in seizing or otherwise interfering with British vessels engaged in the Behring's Sea, outside of territorial waters, during the years 1886, 1887, and 1889. 2. That, pending the award, all interference with British sealing-vessels shall absolutely cease. 3. That the United States' Government, if the award should be adverse to them on the question of legal right, will compensate British subjects for tbe losses which they may sustain by reason of their compliance with the British Proclamation. Such are the three conditions on which it is indispensable, in the view of Her Majesty's Government, that the issue of the proposed Proclamation should be based. As regards the compensation claimed by Her Majesty's Government for the losses and injuries sustained by British subjects by reason of the action of the United States' Government against British sealing-vessels in tbe Behring's Sea during the years 1886, 1887, and 1889,1 have already informed Lord Salisbury of your assurance that the United States' Government would not let that claim stand in the way of an amicable adjustment of the controversy, and I trust that the reply which, by direction of Lord Salisbury, I have now the honour to return to the President's inquiry, may facilitate the attainment of that object, for which we have so long and so earnestly laboured. 1 have, ike. (Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. No. 379. Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 9.) (Telegraphic.) Washington, July 9, 1890. IN the House of Representatives to-day, on the motion of Mr. Hitt, the Chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, a Resolution was adopted, " That the President be requested to furnish the House with the correspondence between the Government of the United States and the Government of Great Britain touching the subjects in dispute in the Behring's Sea since the 4th March, 1889." No. 380. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. g;r> Foreign Office, July 10, 1890. I APPROVE the note addressed by you to Mr. Blaine on the subject of ||| issue of a Proclamation requesting British vessels to abstain from entering the Behring's Sea during the present sealing season, of which a copy was inclosed in your despatch of the 27th ultimo. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURT. 512 No. 381. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, July 10, 1890 I APPROVE the terms of the note in which you forwarded to Mr. Blaine the protest of Her Majesty's Government against any further interference with British sealers in Behring's Sea, as reported in your despatch of the 18th ultimo. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURT. No. 382. The Marquis of Salisbury to Sir J. Pauncefote. Sir, Foreign Office, August 2, 1890. I HAVE received and laid before the Queen your despatch of the 1st ultimo, forwarding a copy of a note from Mr. Blaine, in which he maintains that the United States have derived from Russia rights of jurisdiction over the waters of Behring's Sea to a distance of 100 miles from the coasts transferred to them under the Treaty of the 30th March, 1867. In replying to the arguments to the contrary effect contained in my despatch of the 22nd May, Mr. Blaine draws attention to certain expressions which I had omitted for the sake of brevity in quoting from Mr. Adams' despatch of the 22nd July, 1823. He contends that these words give a different meaning to the despatch, and that the latter does not refute, but actually supports, the present claim of the United States. It becomes necessary, therefore, that I should refer in greater detail to the correspondence, an examination of which will show that the passage in question cannot have the signification which Mr. Blaine seeks to give to it, that the words omitted by me do not in reality affect the point at issue, and that the view which he takes of the attitude both of Great Britain and of the United States towards the claim put forward by Russia in 1822 cannot be reconciled with the tenour of the despatches. It appears from the published papers that in 1799 the Emperor Paul I granted by Charter to the Russian American Company the exclusive right of hunting, trade, industries, and discoveries of new land on the north-west coast of America from Behring's Strait to the 55th degree of north latitude, with permission to the Company to extend their discoveries to the south and to form establishments there, provided they did not encroach upon the territory occupied by other Powers. The southern limit thus provisionally assigned to the Company corresponds, within 20 or 30 miles, with that which was eventually agreed upon as the boundary between the British and Russian possessions. It comprises not only the whole American coast of Behring's Sea, but a long reach of coast-line to the south of the Alaskan Peninsula as far as the level of the southern portion of Prince of Wales' Island. The Charter, which was issued at a time of great European excitement, attracted apparently little attention at the moment, and gave rise to no remonstrance. It made no claim to exclusive jurisdiction over the sea, nor do any measures appear to have been taken under it to restrict the commerce, navigation, or fishery of the subjects of foreign nations. But in September 1821 the Russian Government issued a fresh Ukase, of which the provisions material to the present discussion were as foUows:— " Section 1. The pursuits of commerce, whaling, and fishing, and of all other industry, on all islands, ports, and gulfs, including the whole of the north-west coast of America, beginning from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of northern latitude; also from the Aleutian Islands to the eastern coast of Siberia, as well as along the Kurile Islands from Behring's Strait to the south cape of the Island of Urup, viz., to 45° 50' northern latitude, are exclusively granted to Eussian subjects. " Sec. 2. It is therefore prohibited to all foreign vessels not only to land on the coasts and islands belonging to Eussia, as stated above, but also to approach them within less than 100 Italian miles. The transgressor's vessel is subject to confiscation, along with the whole cargo." By this Ukase the exclusive dominion claimed by Russia on the American Continent was pushed some 250 miles to the south as far as Vancouver Island, and notice 513 was for the first time given of a claim to maritime jurisdiction which was regarded both m England and the United States as extravagant, or, to use Lord Stowell's description of it, "very unmeasured and insupportable." Upon receiving communication of the Ukase, the British and United States' Governments at once objected both to the extension of the territorial claim and to the assertion of maritime jurisdiction. For the present, I will refer only to the protest of the United States' Government. This was made in a note from Mr. John Quincy Adams, then Secretary of State, to the Russian Representative, dated the 25th February, 1822, which contains the foUowing statement :— " I am directed by the President of the United States to inform you that he has seen with surprise in this Edict the assertion of a territorial claim on the part of Eussia extending to the 51st degree of north latitude on this continent, and a regulation interdicting to all commercial vessels other than Eussian, upon the penalty of seizure and confiscation, the approach upon the high seas within 100 Italian miles of the shores to which that claim is made to apply. The relations of the United States with His Imperial Majesty have always been of the most friendly character, and it is the earnest desire of this Government to preserve them in that state. It was expected, before any act which should define the boundary between the territories of the United States and Eussia on this continent, that the same would have been arranged by Treaty between the parties. To exclude the vessels of our citizens from the shore, beyond the ordinary distance to which the territorial jurisdiction extends, has excited still greater surprise. "This Ordinance affects so deeply the.rights of the United States and of then: citizens that I am instructed to inquire whether you are authorized to give explanations of the grounds of right, upon principles generally recognized by the laws and usages of nations, which can warrant the claims and regulations contained in it." The Russian Representative replied at length, defending the territorial claim on grounds of discovery, first occupation, and undisturbed possession, and explaining the motive | which determined the Imperial Government to prohibit foreign vessels from approaching the north-west coasts of America belonging to Russia, within the distance of at least 100 Italian miles. This measure," he said, " however severe it may at first view appear, is after all but a measure of prevention." He went on to say that it was adopted in order to put a stop to an illicit trade in arms and ammunition with the natives, against which the Russian Government had frequently remonstrated; and further on he observed :— " I ought, in the last place, to request you to consider, Sir, that the Eussian possessions in the Pacific Ocean extend, on.the north-west coast of America, from Behring's Strait to the 51st degree of north latitude, and on the opposite side of Asia and the islands adjacent, from the same strait to the 45th degree, the extent of sea of which these possessions form the limits comprehends all the conditions which are ordinarily attached to shut seas ('niers fermees'), and the Eussian Government might, consequently, judge itself authorized to exercise upon this sea the right of sovereignty, and especially that of entirely interdicting the entrance of foreigners. But it preferred only asserting its essential rights, without taking any advantage of localities." To this Mr. Adams replied (30th March, 1822), pointing out that the only ground given for the' extension of the Russian territorial claim was the establishment of a settlement, not upon the continent, but upon a small island, actually within the limits prescribed to the Russian American Company in 1799, and he went on to say :— " This pretension is to he considered not only with reference to the question of territorial right, but also to that prohibition to the vessels of other nations, including those of the United States, to approach within 100 Italian miles of the coasts. From the period of the existence of the United States as an independent nation, their vessels have freely navigated those seas, and the right to navigate them is a part of that independence. fiWm "With regard to the suggestion that the Eussian Government might have justified the exercise of sovereionty°over the Pacific Ocean as a close sea, because it claims territory both on its American and Asiatic shores, it may suffice to say that the distance from shore to shore on this sea, in latitude 51° north, is not less than 90 degrees of longitude, or 4,000 miles." The Russian Representative replied to this note, endeavouring to prove that the territorial rights of Russia on the north-west coast of America were not confined to the limits of the Concession granted to the Russian American Company in 1799, and arguing that the great extent of the Pacific Ocean at the 51st degree of latitude did not invalidate the right which Russia might have to consider that part of the ocean as closed. But he added that further discussion of this point was unnecessary, as the Imperial Government had not thought fit to take advantage of that right. The correspondence then dropped for a time, to be resumed in the following spring. But it is perfectly clear from the above-that the privileges granted to the 3 [128] 8 U ■m 514 Russian American Company in 1799, whatever effect they may have had as regards other Russian subjects, did not operate to exclude American vessels from any part of the coast, and that the attempt to exclude them in 1821 was at once resisted. Further, that the Russian Government had no idea of any distinction between Behring's Sea and the Pacific Ocean, which latter they considered as reaching southward from Behring's Straits. Nor throughout the whole of the subsequent correspondence is there any reference whatever on either side to any distinctive name for Behring's Sea, or any intimation that it could be considered otherwise than as forming an integral part of the Pacific Ocean. I now come to the despatch from Mr. Adams to Mr. Middleton of the 22nd July, 1823, to which reference has before been made, and which it will be necessary to quote somewhat at length. After authorizing Mr. Middleton to enter upon a negotiation with the Russian Ministers concerning the differences which had arisen from the Ukase of the 4th (16th) September, 1821 Mr. Adams continues :— "From the tenour of the Ukase, the pretensions of the Imperial Government extend to an exclusive territorial jurisdiction from the 45th degree of north latitude, on the Asiatic coast, to the latitude of 51° north on the western coast of the American Continent; and they assume the right of interdicting the navigation and the fishery of all other nations to the extent of 100 miles from the whole of that coast. " The United States can admit no part of these claims. Their right of navigation and of fishing is perfect, and has been in constant exercise from the earliest times, after the peace of 1783, throughout the whole extent of the Southern Ocean, subject only to the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions, which, so far as Eussian rights are concerned, are confined to certain islands north of the 55th degree of latitude, and have no existence on the continent of America." Mr. Blaine has argued at great length to show that when Mr. Adams used these clear and forcible expressions he did not mean what he seemed to say; that when he stated that the United States " could admit no part of these claims," he meant that they admitted all that part of them which related to the coast north of the Aleutian Islands; that when he spoke of the Southern Ocean, he meant to except Behring's Sea; and that when he contended that the ordinary exceptions and exclusions of the territorial jurisdictions had no existence, so far as Russian rights were concerned, on the Continent of America, he used the latter term not in a geographical but in a I territorial" sense, and tacitly excepted, by a very singular petitio principii, the Russian possessions. In order to carry out this theory, it is necessary for him also to assume that the negotiators in the course of the discussions made indiscriminate use of the term " north-west coast of America," with a variety of signification which he admits to be " confusing, and, at certain points, apparently contradictory and irreconcilable." The reputation, of the American statesmen and diplomatists of that day for caution and precision affords of itself strong argument against such a view, and, even if this had been otherwise, so forced a construction would require very strong evidence to confirm it. But a glance at the rest of the despatch and at the other papers will show that the more simple interpretation of the words is the correct one. For Mr. Adams goes on to say:— " The correspondence between M. Poletica and this Department contained no discussion of the principles or of the facts upon which he attempted the justification of the Imperial Ukase. This was purposely avoided on our part, under the expectation that the Imperial Government could not fail, upon a review of the measure, to revoke it altogether. It did, however, excite much public animadversion in this country, as the Ukase itself had already done in England. I inclose herewith the' North American Review' for October 1822, No. 37, which contains an Article (p. 370) written by a person fully master of the subject; and for the view of it taken in England I refer you to the fifty-second number of the ' Quarterly Eeview,' the article upon Lieutenant Kotzebue's voyages. From the article in the ' North American Eeview' it will be seen that the rights of discovery, of occupancy, and of uncontested possession, alleged by M. Poletica, are all without foundation in fact " On reference to the last-mentioned article, it will be found that the writer states that " a trade to the north-western coast of America and the free navigation of the waters that wash its shores have been enjoyed as a common right by subjects of the United States and of. several European Powers, without interruption, for nearly forty years. We are by no means prepared to believe, or admit, that all this has been on sufferance merely, and that the rights of commerce and navigation in that region have been vested in Russia alone." Further on he puts the question in the following manner (the italics are his own): "It is not, we apprehend, whether Russia has any settlements that give her territorial claims on the Continent of 515 America. This we do not deny—but it is whether the location of those settlements an& the discoveries of her navigators are such as they are represented to be ; whether they entitle her to the exclusive possession of the whole territory north of 51°, and to sovereignty over, the Pacific Ocean beyond that parallel." These passages sufficiently illustrate Mr. Adams' meaning, if any evidence be required that he used plain language in its ordinary sense. Clearly he meant to deny that the Russian settlements or discoveries gave Russia any claim as of right to exclude the navigation or fishery of other nations from any part of the seas on the coast of America, and that her rights in this respect were limited to the territorial waters of certain islands of which she was in permanent and complete occupation. Having distinctly laid down this proposition as. regards the rights of the case, Mr. Adams went on to state what the United States were ready to agree to as av matter of Conventional arrangement. He said:—. "With regard to the territorial claim, separate from the right of traffic with the natives and from any system of colonial exclusions, we are willing to agree to the boundary-line within which the Emperor Paul had granted exclusive privileges to the Eussian American Company, that is to say, latitude 55°. " If the Eussian Government apprehend serious inconvenience from the illicit traffic of foreigners with their settlements on the north-west coast, it may be effectually guarded against by stipulations similar to those a draft of which is herewith subjoined, and to which you are authorized, on the part of the United States, to agree...." The draft Convention was as follows:— " Draft of Treaty between the United States and Russia. " Article I. In order to strengthen the bonds of friendship, and to preserve in future a perfect harmony and good understanding between the Contracting Parties, it is agreed that their respective citizens and subjects shall not be disturbed or molested, either in navigating or in carrying on their fisheries in the Pacific Ocean or in the South Seas, or in landing on the coasts of those seas, in places not already occupied, for the purpose of carrying on their commerce with the natives of the country, subject, nevertheless, to the restrictions and provisions specified in the two following Articles. " Art. II. To the end that the navigation and fishery of the citizens and subjects of the Contracting Parties, respectively, in the Pacific Ocean or in the South Seas may not be made a pretext for illicit trade with their respective settlements, it is agreed that the citizens of the United States shall not land on any part of the coast actually occupied by Eussian settlements, unless by permission of the Governor or Commander thereof, and that Eussian subjects shall, in like manner, be interdicted from landing without permission at any settlement of the United States on the said north-west coast. " Art. III. It is agreed that no settlement shall be made hereafter on the north-west coast of America by citizens of the United States or under their authority, north, nor by Eussian subjects, or under the authority of Eussia, south of the 55th degree of north latitude." In an explanatory despatch to Mr. Rush, the American Minister in London, same date, Mr. Adams says:— " The right of carrying on trade with the natives throughout the north-west coast they (the United States) cannot renounce. With the Eussian settlements at Kodiak, or at New ArGhangel, they may fairly claim the advantage of a free trade, having so long enjoyed it unmolested, and because it has been and would continue to be as advantageous at least to those settlements as to them. But they will not contest the right of Eussia to prohibit the traffic, as strictly confined to the Eussian settlement itself, and not extending to the original natives of the coast " It is difficult to conceive how the term "north-west coast of America" used here and elsewhere can be interpreted otherwise than as applying to the north-west coast of America generally, or how it can be seriously contended that it was meant to denote only the more westerly portion, excluding the more north-westerly part, because by becoming a Russian possession this latter had ceased to belong to the American Continent. Mr. Blaine states that when Mr. Middleton declared that Russia had no right of exclusion on the coasts of America between the 50th and 60th degrees of north latitude, nor in the seas which washed those coasts, he intended to make a distinction between Behring's Sea and the Pacific Ocean. But upon reference to a Map, it will be seen that the 60th degree of north latitude strikes straight across Behring's Sea, leavino- by far the larger and more important part of it to the south; so that I confess it appears to me that by no conceivable construction of his words can Mr. Middleton be supposed to have excepted that sea from those which he declared to be free. With regard to the construction which Mr. Blaine puts upon the Treaty between the United States and Russia of the 17th April, 1824, I will only saythat it is, as far as I am aware, an entirely novel one, that there is no trace of its having been [128] 3U2 516 known to the various publicists who have given an account of the controversy in Treaties on International 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 lind Articles for insertion in the British Treaty of the 28th 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 alfthe 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 words of the Article : " 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," &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 Russian 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 this point it wiU 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 coast described in Article III." The stipulations of the Treaty were formally renewed by Articles inserted in the General Treaties of Commerce between Great Britain and Russia of 1843 and 1859. But Mr. Blaine states that " the rights of the Russian American Company, which, under both Ukases, included the sovereignty over the sea to the extent of 100 miles from the shores, were reserved by special clause in a separate and special Article signed after the principal Articles of the Treaty had been concluded and signed." Upon this I have to observe, in the first place that the Ukase of 1799 did not contain any mention whatever of sovereignty over the.sea; secondly, that the context of the Separate Article is such as altogether to preclude the interpretation that it was meant to recognize the objectionable claim contained in the Ukase of 1821. I wiH quote the Article at length:— " Separate Article II. "It is understood in like manner that the exceptions, immunities, and privileges hereinafte mentioned shall not be considered as at variance with the principle of reciprocity which forms the basis of the Treaty of this date, that is to say:— " 1. The exemption from navigation dues during the first three years, which is enjoyed by vessels built in Eussia and belonging to Eussian subjects. 12. The exemptions of the like nature granted in the Eussian ports of the Black Sea, the Sea of Azof, and the Danube to such Turkish vessels arriving from ports of the Ottoman Empire situated on the Black Sea, as do not exceed 80 lasts burden. 13. The permission granted to the inhabitants of the coast of the Government of Archangel, to import duty free, or on payment of moderate duties, into the ports of the said Government, dried or salted fish, as likewise certain kinds of furs, and to export therefrom, in the same manner, corn, rope and cordage, pitch, and ravensduck. " 4 The privilege of the Eussian American Company. " 5. The privilege of the Steam Navigation Companies of Lubeck and Havre; lastly, " 6. The immunities granted in Eussia'to certain English Companies, called 'Yacht Clubs.'" To suppose that under the simple words, " the privilege of the Russian American Company," placed in connection with the privilege of French and German Steam Navigation Companies, and the immunities of yacht clubs, it was intended to acknowledge a claim of jurisdiction against which Her Majesty's Government had formally protested as contrary to international law, and which it had avowedly been one of the main objects of the Treaty of 1825 to extinguish, is a suggestion too improbable to require any lengthened discussion. But Her Majesty's Government did not of course agree to the Article without knowing what was the exact nature of the privileges thus excepted from reciprocity. They had received from the Russian Ambassador, in "December 1842, an explanatory Memorandum on this subject, of which the following- is the portion relating to the Russian American Company :— "IV. " La Compagnie Eusse-Americaine a le privilege d'expddier francs de droits: de Cronstadt autour du monde et d'Ochotsk dans les Colonies Busses, les produits Eusses ainsi que les marchandises &rangeres dont les droits ont deja ^te prelevfe; de meme d'importer au retour de ces Colonies des cargaisons de pelleteries et d'autres produits de ces Colonies, sans payer aucun droit si d'apres les lois geiierales il n'est pas ^tabli d'impot particulier intdrieur sur les marchandises de pelleterie. " Observation.—D aprks le Tarif en vigueur, l'importation des fourrures dans les ports de St.-Pdtersbourg et d*Archangel, de production Bnsse et sur des vaisseaux Eusses, est admise sans droits." It is surely incredible that if the privilege of the Prussian American Company did comprise a right of excluding vessels from approaching within 100 miles of the shore, it should not even have been alluded to in this explanation. Nor is it possible to agree in Mr. Blaine's view, that the exclusion of foreign vessels for a distance of 100 miles from the coast remained in force pending the negotiations, and in so far as it was not modified by the Conventions. A claim of j jurisdiction over the open sea, which is not in accordance with the recognized principles of international law or usage, may, of course, be asserted by force, but cannot be said to have any legal validity as against the vessels of other countries, except in so far as it is positively admitted by Conventional Agreements with those countries. I do not suppose that it is necessary that I should argue at length upon so elementary a point as that a claim to prohibit the vessels of other nations from approaching within a distance of 100 miles from the coast is contrary to modern international usage. Mr. Adams and Mr. Canning clearly thought in 1823 that the matter was beyond doubt or discussion. The rule which was recognized at that time, and which has been generally admitted both by publicists and Governments, limits the jurisdiction of a country in the open sea to a distance of 3 miles from its coasts, this having been considered to be the range of a cannon-shot when the principle was adopted. Wheaton, who may be regarded as a contemporary authority, equaUy respected in Europe and America, says :— "The 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 same State. The general usage of nations superadds to this extent of territorial jurisdiction a distance of a marine league, or as far as a cannon-shot will reach from the shore along all the coasts of the State." And again— " The rule of law on this subject is terrce dominium finitur ubi finitur armorumvis; and since the introduction of fire-arms that distance has usually been recognized to be about 3 miles from the shore." Chancellor Kent, who is inclined to advocate a more extended limit, still admits that:— | According to the current of modern authority, the general territorial jurisdiction extends into the sea as far as cannon-shot will reach, and no farther; and this is generally calculated to be a marine league." Calvo, one of the most recent text-writers, makes a corresponding statement :— "Les limites juridictionnelles d'un Etat embrassent non seulement son territoire, mais encore les eaux qui le traversent ou l'entourent, les ports, les baies, les golfes, les embouchures des fleuves et les mers enclavees dans son territoire. L'usage general des] nations permet egalement aux Etats d'exercer leur juridiction sur la zone maritime jusqu'& 3 mOle marins ou k la portfe de canon de leurs c&tes." But I need scarcely appeal to any other authority than that of the United States' Government itself. In a note to the Spanish Minister, dated the 16th December, 1862, on the subject of the Spanish claim to a'6-mile limit at sea, Mr. Seward stated:—* "A third principle bearing on the subject is also well established, namely, that this exclusive sovereignty of a nation—thus abridging- the universal liberty of the seas—extends no farther than the power of the nation to maintain it by force, stationed on the coast, extends. This principle is tersely expressed in the maxim : ' Terrm dominium finitur ubi finitur armorum vis.' " But it must always be a matter of uncertainty and dispute at what point the force of arms, exerted on the coast, can actually reach. The publicists rather advanced towards than reached a solution when they laid down the rule that the limit of the force is the range of a cannon-ball. The range of a cannon-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 jurisdiction 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 Undersigned thinks, in fixing the limit at 3 miles from the coast. This limit was early proposed by the publicists of all maritime nations. While it is not insisted that ah. nations have accepted or acquiesced and bound themselves to abide by this rule when applied to themselves, yet three points involved in the subject are insisted upon by the United States:— * Wharton's International Law Digest, vol. i, § 32, 518 " 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 for itself a larger limit, this has been done by the exercise of maritime power, and constitutes an exception to the general understanding which fixes the range of a cannon-shot (when it is made the test of jurisdiction) at 3 miles. So generally is this rule accepted, that writers commonly use the expressions of a range of cannon-shot and 3 miles as equivalents of each other. In other cases, they use the latter expression as a substitute for the former." And in a later communication on the same subject of the 10th August, 1863, he observes:— "Nevertheless, it cannot be admitted, nor indeed is Mr. Tassara understood to claim, that the mere assertion of a Sovereign, by an act of legislation, however solemn, can have the effect to establish and fix its external maritime jurisdiction. His right to a jurisdiction of 3 miles is derived, not from his own Decree, but from the law of nations, and exists, even though he may never have proclaimed or asserted it by any Decree or Declaration whatsoever. He cannot, by a mere Decree, extend the limit and fix it at 6 miles, because, if he could, he could in the same manner, and upon motives of interest, ambition, or even upon caprice, fix it at 10, or 20, or 50 miles without the consent or acquiescence of other Powers which have a common right with himself in the freedom of all the oceans. Such a pretension could never be successfully or rightfully maintained." The same principles were laid down :n a note addressed to Sir E. Thornton by Mr. Fish, then Secretary of State, on the 22nd January, 1875. Mr. Fish there stated: 1 We have always understood and asserted that pursuant to public law no nation can rightfully claim jurisdiction at sea beyond a marine league from the coast." He then went on to explain the only two exceptions that were apparently known to him so far as the United States were concerned: certain Revenue Laws which admitted the boarding of vessels at a distance of 4 leagues from the coast, which, he said, had never been so applied in practice as to give rise to complaint on the part of a foreign Government; and a Treaty between the United States and Mexico of 1848, in which the boundary-line between the two States was described as beginning in the Gulf of Mexico, 3 leagues from land. As regards this stipulation, he observed that it had been explained at the time that it could only affect the rights of Mexico and the United States, and was never intended to trench upon the rights of Great Britain or of any other Power under the law of nations. It would seem, therefore, that Mr. Fish was entirely unaware of the exceptional jurisdiction in Behring's Sea, which is now said to have been conceded by the United States to Russia from 1823 to 1867, transferred to the United States, so far as the American coast was concerned, only eight years before he wrote, and which would presumably be still acknowledged by them as belonging to Russia on the Asiatic shore. I must suppose that when Mr. Blaine states that " both the United States and Great Britain recognized, respected, obeyed " the Ukase of 1821, in so far as it affected Behring's Sea, he has some evidence to go upon in regard to the conduct of his country which is unknown to the world at large, and which he has not as yet produced. But I must be allowed altogether to deny that the attitude of Great Britain was such as he represents, or that she ever admitted by act or by sufferance the extraordinary claim of maritime jurisdiction which that Ukase contained. The inclosed copies of correspondence, extracted from the archives of this Office, make it very difficult to believe that Mr. Blaine has not been altogether led into error. It results from them that not only did Her Majesty's Government formally protest against the Ukase on its first issue as contrary to the acknowledged law of nations, but that the Russian Government gave a verbal assurance that the claim of jurisdiction would not be exercised. In the subsequent negotiations great importance was attached to obtaining a more formal disavowal of the claim in the manner least hurtful to Russian susceptibilities, but so as effectuaUy to preclude its revival. And this security the British Government undoubtedly considered that both they and the United States had obtained by the Conventions of 1824 and 1825. Upon this point the instructions given by Mr. George Canning to Mr. Stratford Canning when the latter was named Plenipotentiary to negotiate the Treaty of 1825 have a material bearing. Writing under date the 8th December, 1824, after giving a summary of the negotiations up to that date, he goes on to say :— " It is comparatively indifferent to us whether we hasten or postpone all questions respecting the limits of territorial possession on the Continent of America, but the pretensions of the Eussian Ukase of 1821, to exclusive dominion over the Pacific, could not continue longer unrepealed without compelling us to take some measure of public and effectual remonstrance against it. 519 " You will, therefore, take care in the first instance to repress any attempt to give this change to the character of the negotiation, and will declare, without reserve, that the point to which alone the solicitude of the British Government, and the jealousy of the British nation, attach any great importance is the doing away (in a manner as little disagreeable to Eussia as possible) of the effect of the Ukase of 1821. " That this Ukase is not acted upon, and that instructions have long ago been sent by the Eussian Government to their cruizers in the Pacific to suspend the execution of its provisions, is true, but a private disavowal of a published claim is no security against the revivalof that claim; the suspension of the execution of a principle may be perfectly compatible with the continued maintenance of the principle itself. ****** I The right of the subjects of His Majesty to navigate freely in the Pacific cannot be held as a matter of indulgence from any Power. Having once been publicly questioned, it must be publicly acknowledged. " We do not desire that any distinct reference should be made to the Ukase of 1821, but we do feel it necessary that the statement of our right should be clear and positive, and that it should stand forth in the Convention in the place which properly belongs to it as a plain and substantive stipulation, and not be brought in as an incidental consequence of other arrangements to which we attach comparatively little importance. "This stipulation stands in the grant of the Convention concluded between Eussia and the United States of America, and we see no reason why, upon similar claims, we should not obtain- exactly the like satisfaction. "For reasons of the same- nature we cannot consent that the liberty of navigation through Behring's Straits should be stated in the Treaty as a boon from Eussia. " The tendency of such a statement would be to give countenance to those claims of exclusive jurisdiction against which we, on our own behalf and on that of the whole civilized world, protest. ****** " It will of course Strike the Eussian Plenipotentiaries that, by the adoption of the American Article respecting navigation, &c, the provision for an exclusive fishery of 2 leagues from the coasts of our respective possessions falls to the ground. " But the omission is, in truth, immaterial " The law of nations assigns the exclusive sovereignty of 1 league to each Power off its own coasts, without any specified stipulation, and though Sir Charles Bagot was authorized to sign the Convention with the specific stipulation of 2 leagues, in ignorance of what had been decided in the American Convention at the time, yet, after that Convention has been some months before the world, and after the opportunity of reconsideration has been forced upon us by the act of Eussia herself, we cannot now consent, in negotiating de novo, to a stipulation which, while it is absolutely unimportant to any practical good, would appear to establish a contract between the United States and us to our disadvantage." Mr. Stratford Canning, in his despatch of the 1st March, 1825, inclosing the Convention as signed, says :— " With respect to Behring's Straits, I am happy to have it in my power to assure you on the joint authority of the Eussian Plenipotentiaries, that the Emperor of Eussia has no intention whatever of maintaining any exclusive claim to the navigation of these Straits, or of the seas to the north of them.' These extracts show conclusively: (1) that England refused to admit any part of the Russian claim asserted by the Ukase of 1821 to a maritime jurisdiction and exclusive right of fishing throughout the whole extent of that claim, from Behring's Straits to the 51st parallel; (2) that the Convention of 1825 was regarded on both sides as a renunciation on the part of Russia of that claim in its entirety; and (3) that though Behring's Straits was known and specifically provided for, Behring's Sea was not known by that name, but was regarded as part ot: the Pacific Ocean. The answer, therefore, to the questions with which Mr. Blaine concludes his despatch is that Her Majesty's Government have always claimed the freedom of navigation and fishing in the waters of Behring's Sea outside the usual territorial limit of 1 marine league from the coast; that it is impossible to admit that a public right to fish, catch seals, or pursue any other lawful occupation on the high seas can be held to be abandoned by a nation from the mere fact that for a certain number of years it has not suited the subjects of that nation to exercise it. It must be remembered that British Columbia has come into existence as a Colony at a comparatively recent date, and that the first considerable influx of population, some thirty years ago, was due to the discovery of gold, and did not tend to an immediate development of the shipping interest. I have to request that you will communicate a copy of this despatch, and of its inclosures, to Mr. Blaine. Tou will state that Her Majesty's Government have no desire whatever to refuse to the United States any jurisdiction in Behring's Sea which was conceded by Great Britain to Russia, and which properly accrues to the present 520 possessors of Alaska in virtue of Treaties or the law of nations; and that if the United States' Government, after examination of the evidence and arguments which I have produced, still differ from them as to the legality of the recent captures in that sea, they are ready to agree that the question, with the issues that depend upon it, should be referred to impartial arbitration. Tou will in that case be authorized to consider, in concert with Mr. Blaine, the method of procedure to be followed. I am, &c. (Signed) SALISBURT. Inclosure 1 in No. 382. Lord Londonderry to Count Lieven. Foreign Office, January 18,1822. THE Undersigned has the honour hereby to acknowledge the note addressed to him by Baron de Nicolai, of the 12th November last, covering a copy of an Ukase issued by His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of AU the Russias, and bearing date the 4th September, 1821, for various purposes therein set forth, especiaUy connected with the territorial rights of his Crown on the north-western coast of America bordering upon the Pacific, and the commerce and navigation of His Imperial Majesty's subjects in the seas adjacent thereto. This document, containing Regulations of great extent and importance, both in its territorial and maritime bearings, has been considered with the utmost attention, and with those favourable sentiments which His Majesty's Government always bear towards the acts of a State with which His Majesty has the satisfaction to feel himself connected by the most intimate ties of friendship and alliance, and having been referred for the Report of those high legal authorities whose duty it is to advise His Majesty on such matters, the Undersigned is directed, till such friendly explanations can take place between the two Governments as may obviate misunderstanding upon so delicate and important a point, to make such provisional protest against the enactments of the said Ukase as may fully serve to save the rights of His Majesty's Crown, and may protect the persons and properties of His Majesty's subjects from molestation in the exercise of their lawful callings in that quarter of the globe. The Undersigned is commanded to acquaint Count Lieven that, it being the King's constant desire to respect and cause to be respected by bis subjects, in the fullest manner, the Emperor of Russia's just rights, His Majesty will be ready to enter into amicable explanations upon the interests affected by this instrument, in such manner as may be most acceptable to His Imperial Majesty. In the meantime, upon the subject of this Ukase generally, and especiaUy upon the two main principles of claim laid down therein, viz., an exclusive sovereignty aUeged to belong to Russia over the territories therein described, as also the exclusive right of navigating and trading within the maritime Umits therein set forth, His Britannic Majesty must be understood as hereby reserving all his rights, not being prepared to admit that the intercourse which is allowed on the face of this instrument to have hitherto subsisted on those coasts, and in those seas, can be deemed to be illicit; or that the ships of friendly Powers, even supposing an unqualified sovereignty was proved to appertain to the Imperial Crown, in these vast and very imperfectly occupied territories, could, by the acknowledged law of nations, be excluded from navigating within the distance of 100 Italian miles, as therein laid down, from the coast the exclusive dominion of which is assumed (but as His Majesty's Government conceive in error) to belong to His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias. (Signed) LONDONDERRT. 521 . Inclosure 2 in No. 382. Memorandum by the Duke of Wellington.—(September 11, 1822.) IN the course of a conversation which I had yesterday with Count Lieven, he informed that he had been directed to give verbal explanations of the Ukase respecting the north-western coast of America. These explanations went, he said, to this, that the Emperor did not propose to carry into execution the Ukase in its extended sense; that His Imperial Majesty's ships had been directed to cruize at the shortest possible distance from the shore, in order to supply the natives with arms and ammunition, and in order to warn all vessels that that was His Imperial Majesty's dominion, and that His Imperial Majesty had besides given directions to his Minister in the United States to agree upon a Treaty of Limits with the United States. Inclosure 3 in No. 382. Mr. G. Canning to the Duke of Wellington. My Lord Duke, Foreign Office, September 27, 1822. TOUR Grace is already in possession of all that has passed both here and at St. Petersburgh, on the subject of the issue, in September of last year, by the Emperor of Russia, of an Ukase, indirectly asserting an exclusive right of sovereignty from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude on the west coast of America, and to the 45th degree north on the opposite coast of Asia; and (as a qualified exercise of that right) proliibiting aU foreign ships, under pain of confiscation, from approaching within 100 ItaUan miles of those coasts. This Ukase having been communicated by Baron Nicolai, the Russian Charg£ d'Affaires at this Court, to His Majesty's Government, was forthwith submitted to the legal authorities whose duty it is to advise His Majesty on such matters, and a note was in consequence addressed by the late Marquis of Londonderry to Count Lieven, the Russian Ambassador, and also communicated to His Majesty's Ambassador at St. Petersburgh, protesting against the enactments of the said Ukase, and requesting such amicable explanations as might tend to reconcUe the pretensions of Russia in that quarter of the globe with the just rights of His Majesty's Crown and the interests of his subjects. As such explanations will probably be offered to your Grace during the Conferences about to take place at Vienna, I hasten to signify to you the King's commands as to the language which you will hold on the part of His Majesty upon this subject. The opinions given in November and December last by Lord Stowell and by His Majesty's Advocate-General (copies of which are already in your possession) will furnish you with the best legal arguments in opposition to the pretensions put forward in the Russian Ukase ; and, as in both these opinions much stress is very properly laid upon the state of actual occupation of the territories claimed by Russia, and the different periods of time at which they were so occupied, I have obtained from the Governor of the principal Company of His Majesty's subjects trading in that part of the world the information which your Grace will find in the inclosed papers. That information wiU enable you sufficiently to prove to the Russian Minister, not only that the point of prior discovery may be fairly disputed with Russia, but that the much more certain title of actual occupation by the agents and the trading servants of the Hudson's Bay Company extends at this moment to many degrees of higher latitude on the north-west coast of America than is claimed as the territory of Russia by the Ukase in question. EnUghtened statesmen and jurists have long held as insignificant aU titles of territory that are not founded on actual occupation, and that title is, in the opinion of the most esteemed writers on public law, to be established only by practical use. With respect to the other points in the Ukase which have the effect of extending the territorial rights of Russia over the adjacent seas to the unprecedented distance, of 100 miles from the Une of coast, and of closing a hitherto unobstructedpassage, at the present moment the object of important discoveries for the promotion of general commerce and navigation, these pretensions are considered by the best legal authorities as positive innovations on the rights of navigation; as such they can receive no explanation from further discussion, nor can by possibility be justified. Common usage, which has [128] 3 X 522 obtained the force of law, has indeed assigned to coasts and shores an accessorial boundary to a short Umited distance for purposes of protection and general convenience, in no manner interfering with the rights of others, and not obstructing the freedom of general commerce and navigation. But this important qualification the extent of the present claim entirely excludes, and when such a prohibition is, as in the present case, appUed to a long line of coasts and also to intermediate islands in remote seas, where navigation is beset with innumerable and unforeseen difficulties, and where the principal employment of the fisheries must be pursued under circumstances which are incompatible with the prescribed courses, all particular considerations concur, in an especial manner, with tbe general principle, in repelling such a pretension as an encroachment on the freedom of navigation, and the unalienable rights of all nations. I have, indeed, the satisfaction to believe, from a conference which I have had with Count Lieven on this matter, that upon these two points—the attempt to shut up the passage altogether, and the claim of exclusive dominion to so enormous a distance from the coast—the Russian Government are prepared entirely to waive their pretensions. The only effort that has been made to justify the latter claim was by reference to an Article in the Treaty of Utrecht, which assigns 30 leagues from the coast as the distance of prohibition. But to this argument it is sufficient to answer that the assumption of such a space was, in the instance quoted, by stipulation in a Treaty, and one to which, therefore, the party to be affected by it had (whether wisely or not) given its deliberate consent. No inference could be drawn from that transaction in favour of a claim by authority against all the world. I have little doubt, therefore, but that the public notification of the claim to consider the portions of the ocean included between the adjoining coasts of America and the Russian Empire as a mare clausum, and to extend the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of Russia to 100 Italian miles from the coast, will be publicly recalled; and I have the King's commands to instruct your Grace further to require of the Russian Minister (on the ground of the facts and reasonings furnished in this despatch and its inclosures) that-such a portion of territory alone shall be defined as belonging to Russia as shall not interfere with the rights and actual possessions of His Majesty's subjects in North America. I am, &c. (Signed) GEO. CANNING. Inclosure 4 in No 382. Memorandum on Russian Ukase o/1821. IN the month of September 1821 His Imperial Majesty the Emperor of Russia issued an Ukase asserting the existence in the Crowm of Russia of an exclusive right of sovereignty in the countries extending from Behring's Straits to the 51st degree of north latitude on the west coast of America, and to the 45th degree of north latitude on the opposite coast of Asia ; and, as a qualified exercise of that right of sovereignty, prohibiting all foreign vessels from approaching within 100 Italian miles of those coasts. After this Ukase had been submitted by the King's Government to those legal authorities whose duty it is to advise His Majesty on such matters, a note was addressed by the late Marquis of Londonderry to Count Lieven, the Russian Ambassador, protesting against the enactments of this Ukase, and requesting such amicable explanations as might tend to reconcile the pretensions of Russia in that quarter of the globe with the just rights of His Majesty's Crown and the interests of his subjects. We object, first, to the claim of sovereignty as set forth in this Ukase; and, secondly, to the mode in which it is exercised. The best writers on the laws of nations do not attribute the exclusive sovereignty, particularly of continents, to those Avho have first discovered them ; and although we might on good grounds dispute with Russia the priority of discovery of these continents, we contend that the much more easily proved, more conclusive, and more certain title of occupation and use ought to decide the claim of sovereignty. Now, we can prove that the English North-West Company and the Hudson's Bay Company have for many years established forts and other trading-stations in a country caRed New Caledonia, situated to the west of a range of mountains caUed 523 Rocky Mountains, and extending along the shores of the Pacific Ocean from latitude 49° to latitude 60°. This Company likewise possess factories and other establishments on Mackenzie's River, which falls into the Frazer River as far north as latitude 66° 30', from whence they carry on trade with the Indians inhabiting the countries to the west of that river, and who, from the nature of the country, can communicate with Mackenzie's River with more facility than they can with the posts in New Caledonia. Thus, in opposition to the claims founded on discovery, the priority of which, however, we conceive we might fairly dispute, we have the indisputable claim of occupancy and use for a series of years, which all the best writers on the laws of nations admit is the best-founded claim for territory of this description. Objecting, as we do, to this claim of exclusive sovereignty on the part of Russia, I might save myself the trouble of discussing the particular mode of its exercise as set forth in this Ukase. But we object to the sovereignty proposed to be exercised under this Ukase not less than we do to the claim of it. We cannot admit the' right of any Power possessing the sovereignty of a country to exclude the vessels of others from the seas on its coasts to the distance of 100 Italian miles. We must object Ukewise to the arrangements contained in the said Ukase conveying to private merchant-ships the right to search in time of peace, &c, which are quite contrary to the laws and usages of nations and to the practice of modern times. (Signed) WELLINGTON. Verona, October 17,1822. To Count Nesselrode. Inclosure 5 in No. 382. Count Nesselrode to the Duke of Wellington. (Meinoire Confidentiel.) Ve'rone, le 11 (23) Novembre, 1822. LE Cabinet de Russie a pris en mure consideration le Meinoire Confidentiel que M. le Due de Wellington lui a remis le 17 Octobre dernier, relativement aux mesures adoptees par Sa Majesto PEmpereur, sous la date du (4) 16 Septembre, 1821, pour determiner l'etendue des possessions Russes sur la c6te nord-ouest de l'Amerique, et pour interdire aux vaisseaux strangers l'approche de ses possessions jusqu'a la distance de 100 milles d'.Italie. Les ouvertures faites a ce sujet au Gouvernement de Sa Majest'e Britannique par le Comte de Lieven au moment ou cet Ambassadeur allait quitter Londres doivent cleja avoir prouve que l'opinion que le Cabinet de St. James avait concue des mesures dont il s'agit n'etait point fondle sur une appreciation entierement exacte des vues de Sa Majeste Imperiale. La Russie est loin de m^connaitre que l'usage et l'occupation constituent la plus soUde des titres d'apres lesquels un Etat puisse reclamer des droits de souverainete sur une portion quelconque du Continent. La Russie est plus loin encore d'avoir voulu outrepasser arbitrairement les limites que ce titre assigne a ses domaines sur la cote nord-ouest de l'Amerique, ou eriger en principe general de droit maritime les regies qu'une n^cessite purement locale l'avait obligee de poser pour la navigation etrangere dans le voisinage de la partie de cette c6te qui lui appartient. C'eiait au contraire parce qu'elle regardait ces droits de souverainete comme legitimes, et parce que des considerations imperieuses tenant a l'existence meme du commerce qu'eUe fait dans les parages de la c6te nord-ouest de l'Amerique, la forcaient a etablir un systeme de precautions devenues indispensables, qu'elle a fait paraitre l'Oukase du (4) 16 Septembre, 1821. La Russie serait toujours prete a faire part des motifs qui en justifient les dispositions ; mais pour le moment elle se bornera aux observations suivantes:— M. le Due de Wellington affirme, dans son Meinoire Confidentiel du 17 Octobre, que des etabUssements Anglais, appartenant a deux Compagnies, celle de la Baye de Hudson et celle du Nord-Ouest, se sont formes dans une contree appelee la NouveUe- Cal^donie, qui s'etend le long de la c6te de l'Ocean Pacifique, depuis le 49e jusqu'au 60e degr6 de latitude septentrionale. La Russie ne parlera point des etablissements qui peuvent exister entre le 49e et le 51e parallele;' mais quant aux autres, elle n'h^site pas de convenir qu'elle en ignore jusqu'a present l'existence, pour autant au moins qu'ils toucheraient l'Ocean Pacifique. Les Cartes Anglaises meme les plus recentes et les plus detaiUees n'indiquent [1:8] 3X2 524 absolument aucune des stations de commerce mentionnees dans le Memoire du 17 Octobre, sur la c6te meme de l'Amerique, cntre le 51e et le 60e degre de latitude septentrionale. D'aUleurs, depuis les expeditions de Behring et de Tchirikoff, c'est-a-dire depuis pres d'un siecle, des etablissements Busses ont pris, a partir du 60e degre, une extension progressive, qui des l'annee 1799 les avait fait parvenir jusqu'au 55e paraUele, comme le porte la premiere charte de la Compagnie Russe-Americaine, charte qui a recu dans le temps une publicite officielle, et qui n'a motive aucune protestation de la part de l'Angleterre. Cette meme charte accordait a la Compagnie Russe le droit de porter ses etablissements vers le midi au dela du 55e degre de latitude septentrionale, pourvu que de tels accroissements de territoire ne pussent donner motif de reclamation a aucune Puissance etrangere. L'Angleterre n'a pas non plus proteste contre cette disposition; eUe n'a pas meme reclame contre les nouveaux etablissements que la Compagnie Russe-Americaine a pu former au sud du 55e degre, en vertu de ce privilege. La Russie etait done pleinement autoris£e a profiter d'un consentement qui, pour etre tacite, n'en etait pas moins solennel, et a determiner pour homes de ses domaines le degre de latitude jusqu'auquel la Compagnie Russe avait etendu ses operations depuis 1799. Quoiqu'il en soit, et quelque force que ces circonstances pretent aux titres de la Russie, Sa Majeste Imperiale ne deviera point dans cette conjuncture du systeme habituel de sa politique. Le premier de ses vceux sera toujours de prevenir toute discussion, et de consolider de plus en plus les rapports d'amitie et de parfaite inteUigence qu'elle se feiicite d'entretenir avec la Grande-Bretagne. En consequence l'Empereur a charge son Cabinet de declarer a M. le Due de WeUington (sans que cette declaration puisse prejudlcier en rien a ses droits, si eUe n'etait point acceptoe) qu'il est pret a fixer, au moyen d'une negotiation amicale, et sur la base des convenances mutueUes, les degres de latitude et de longitude que les deux Puissances regarderont comme dernieres llmites de leurs possessions et de leurs etablissements sur la c6te nord-ouest de l'Amerique. Sa Majeste Imperiale se plait a croire que cette negotiation pourra se terminer sans difficulte a la satisfaction retiproque des deux Etats; et le Cabinet de Russie peut assurer des a present M. le Due de Wellington que les mesures de precaution et de surveillance qui seront prises alors sur la partie Russe de la c6te d'Amerique se trouveront entierement conformes aux droits derivant de la souverainete, ainsi qu'aux usages etablis entre nations, et qu'aucune plainte legitime ne pourra s'eiever contre elles. (Translation.) (Confidential Memorandum.) Verona, November 11 (23), 1822. THE Cabinet of Russia have taken into mature consideration the Confidential Memorandum forwarded to them by the Duke of Wellington on the 17th October last, relative to the measures adopted by His Majesty the Emperor, under date of the 4th (16th) September, 1821, for defining the extent of the Russian possessions on the north-west coast of America, and for forbidding foreign vessels to approach his possessions within a distance of 100 Italian miles. The overtures made on this subject to the Government of His Britannic Majesty by Count de Lieven at the moment when that Ambassador was about to leave London must already have proved that the opinion which the Cabinet of St. James' had formed of the measures in question was not founded on an entirely accurate appreciation of the views of His Imperial Majesty. Russia is far from failing to recognize that custom and occupation constitute {he most soUd title upon which a State can claim rights of sovereignty over any portion of the mainland. Russia is still further from having wished to arbitrarily transgress the limits which that title assigns to her dominions on the north-west coast of America, or to exalt into a general principle of maritime law the rules which a necessity of purely local character had obliged her to lay down for foreign navigation in the neighbourhood of the portion of that coast which belongs to her. It was, on the contrary, because she regarded those rights of sovereignty as legitimate, and because imperious considerations involving the very existence of the commerce which she carries on in the latitudes of the north-west coast of America compelled her to establish a system of precautions which became indispensable, that she caused the Ukase of the 4th (16th) September, 1821, to be issued. )25 Russia would be always ready to explain the motives which justify the provisions of that document; but for the moment she will confine herself to the following observations :— The Duke of WelUngton asserts, in his Confidential Memorandum of the 17th October, that English estabUshments belonging to two Companies, the Hudson's Bay Company and the North-West Company, have been formed in a country called New- Caledonia, which extends along the coast of the Pacific Ocean from the 49th to the 60th degree of north latitude. Russia wiU not refer to the estabUshments which may exist between the 49th and 51st parallel; but, with regard to the others, she does not hesitate to admit that she is, up to the present, ignorant of their existence in so far at least as to their touching the Pacific Ocean. Even the most recent and most minute English Maps give absolutely no indication of the trading stations, mentioned in the Memorandum of the 17th October, on the coast of America between the 51st and 60th degree of north latitude. On the other hand, since the expeditions of Behring and Tchirikoff, that is nearly a century ago, Russian establishments have extended progressively from the 60th degree, so that by the year 1799 they had reached the 55th parallel, as is shown by the first Charter of the Russo-American Company, a Charter which received official pubUcity at the time, and drew forth no protest on the part of England. This same Charter granted to the Russian Company the right to extend its establishments towards the south beyond the 55th degree of north latitude, provided that such increase of territory could not give rise to objections on the part of any foreign Power. Nor did England protest against this provision either, nor did she even object to the new establishments which the Russo-American Company was able to form to the south of the 55th degree in virtue of that privUege. Russia was therefore fully entitled to profit by a consent which, for being tacit, was none the less solemn, and to fix as the boundary of her dominions the degree of latitude up to which the Russian Company had extended its operations since 1799. Be this as it may, and whatever force these circumstances may give to the titles of Russia, His Imperial Majesty will not deviate at this juncture from the habitual system of his policy. His first wish will always be to prevent all discussion, and to strengthen more and more tbe relations of friendship and complete understanding which he is happy to maintain with Great Britain. Consequently, the Emperor has charged his Cabinet to declare to the Duke of (such declaration not to prejudice his rights in any way if it be not accepted) that he is ready to fix, by means of friendly negotiation and on the basis of mutual accommodation, the degrees of latitude and longitude which the two Powers shall regard as the utmost limits of their possessions and of their establishments on the north-west coast of America. His Imperial Majesty is pleased to beUeve that this negotiation can be completed without difficulty, to the mutual satisfaction of the two States; and the Cabinet of Russia can, from this moment, assure the Duke of Wellington that the measures of precaution and superintendence which wiU then be taken on the Russian part of the coast of America wiU be entirely in conformity with the rights derived from sovereignty and with the established customs of nations, and that there wUl be no possibility of legitimate cause of complaint against them. Wellington Inclosure 6 in No. 382. The Duke of Wellington to Mr. G. Canning. gir Verona, November 28, 1822. I INCLOSE the copy of a Confidential Memorandum which I gave to Count Nesselrode on the 17th October, regarding the Russian Ukase, and the copy of his answer. I have had one or two discussions with Count Lieven upon this paper, to which I object, as not enabling His Majesty's Government to found upon it any negotiation to settle the questions arising out of the Ukase, which have not got the better of these difficulties; and I inclose you the copy of a letter which I have written to Count Lieven, which explains my objections to the Russian | Memoire Confidentiel." This 526 question, then, stands exactly where it did. I have not been able to do anything upon it. I have, &c. (Signed) WELLINGTON. Inclosure 7 in No. 382. The Duke of Wellington to Count Lieven. M. le Comte, Verona, November 28, 1822. HAVING considered the paper which your ExceUency gave me last night, on the part of his ExceUency Count Nesselrode, on the subject of our discussions on the Russian Ukase, I must inform you that I cannot consent, on the part of my Government, to found on that paper the negotiation for the settlement of the question which has arisen between the two Governments on this subject. We object to the Ukase on two grounds: (1) that His Imperial Majesty assumes thereby an exclusive sovereignty in North America, of which we are not prepared to acknowledge the existence or the extent; upon this point, however, the Memoir of Count Nesselrode does afford the means of negotiation; and my Government will be ready to discuss it, either in London or St. Petersburgh, whenever the state of the discussions on the other question arising out of the Ukase wUl allow of the discussion. The second ground on which we object to the Ukase is that His Imperial Majesty thereby excludes from a certain considerable extent of the open sea vessels of other nations. We contend that the assumption of this power is contrary to the law of nations; and we cannot found .a negotiation upon a paper in which it is again broadly asserted. We contend that no Power whatever can exclude another from the use of the open sea; a Power can exclude itself from the navigation of a certain coast, sea, &c., by its own act or engagement, but it cannot by right be excluded by another. This we consider as the law of nations; and we cannot negotiate upon a paper in which a right is asserted inconsistent with this principle. I think, therefore, that the best mode of proceeding would be that you should state your readiness to negotiate upon the whole subject, without restating the objectionable principle of the Ukase which we cannot admit. I have, &c. (Signed) WELLINGTON. Inclosure 8 in No. 382. The Duke of Wellington to Mr. G. Canning. Sir, Verona, November 29, 1822. SINCE I wrote to you yesterday I have had another conversation with the Russian Minister regarding the Ukase. It is now settled that both the Memorandums which I inclosed to you should be considered as non avenus, and tbe Russian Ambassador in London is to address you a note in answer to that of the late Lord Londonderry, assuring you of the desire of the Emperor to negotiate with you upon the whole question of the Emperor's claims in North America, reserving them all if the result of the negotiation should not be satisfactory to both parties. This note wiU then put this matter in a train of negotiation, which is what was wished. I have, &c. (Signed) WELLINGTON Inclosure 9 in No. 382. Count Lieven to Mr. G. Canning. A LA suite des declarations verbales que le Soussigne, Ambassadeur Extraordinaire et PienipotentiaUe de Sa Majeste l'Empereur de Toutes les Russies, a faites au Ministere de Sa Majeste Britannique, le Cabinet de St. James a du se convaincre que si des objections s'etaient eievees contre le Reglement publie au nom de Sa 527 Majeste l'Empereur de Toutes les Russies sous la date du 4 (16) Septembre, 1821, les mesures ulterieures adoptees par Sa Majeste Imperiale ne laissent aucun doute sur la purete de ses vues et sur le desir qu'elle aura toujours de concilier ses droits et ses interets avec les interets et les droits des Puissances auxquelles l'unissent les liens d'une amitie veritable et d'une bienveiUance retiproque. Avant de quitter Verone, le Soussigne a recu l'ordre de donner au Gouvernement de Sa Majeste Britannique une nouveUe preuve des dispositions connues de l'Empereur, en proposant a son Excellence M. Canning, Principal Secretaire d'Etat de Sa Majeste Britannique pour les Affaires Etrangeres, sans que cette proposition puisse porter atteinte aux droits de Sa Majeste Imperiale, si eUe n'est pas acceptee, que de part et d'autre la question de droit strict soit provisoirement ecartee, et que tous les differends auxquels a donne lieu le Reglenient dont U s'agit, s'applanissent par un arrangement amical fonde sur le seul principe des convenances mutueUes et qui serait negocie a St. Petersbourg. L'Empereur se flatte que Sir Charles Bagot ne tardera point a recevoir les pouvoirs et les instructions necessaires a cet effet, et que la proposition du Soussigne achevera de demontrer au Gouvernement de Sa Majeste Britannique combien Sa Majeste Imperiale souhaite qu'aucune divergence d'opinion ne puisse subsister entre la Russie et la Grande-Bretagne, et que le plus parfait accord continue de presider a leurs relations. < Le Soussigne, &e. (Signe) LIEVEN. Londres, le 19 (31) Janvier, 1823. (Translation.) BT the verbal declarations made by the Undersigned, Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias, to Her Britannic Majesty's Government, the Cabinet of St. James' must have been convinced that, though exception had been taken to the Regulation pubUshed on the 4th (16th) September, 1821, in the name of His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias, the subsequent steps taken by His Imperial Majesty leave no doubt as to the purity of his intentions, and as to the desire which will always animate him to reconcile his own rights and interests with those of the Powers to which he is Unked by bonds of true friendship and reciprocal good-will. Before leaving Verona the Undersigned received instructions to give the Government of Her Britannic Majesty a new proof of the known feeUngs of the Emperor, by proposing to his Excellency Mr. Canning, Her Britannic Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, whfist reserving the rights of His Imperial Majesty- should the proposal not be accepted, that the question of strict right should be provisionally set aside by both parties, and that all the differences created by the Regulation in question should be smoothed over by a friendly arrangement based solely on the principle of mutual accommodation to be negotiated at St. Petersburgh. The Emperor flatters himself that Sir Charles Bagot wUl very shortly receive the necessary powers and instructions in the above sense, and that the proposal of the Undersigned will completely convince the Government of Her Britannic Majesty of the earnest wish of His Imperial Majesty that no difference of opinion should exist between Russia and Great Britain, and that the most perfect agreement should continue to guide their relations. The Undersigned, &c. (Signed) LIEVEN. London, January 19 (31), 1823. Inclosure 10 in No. 382. Mr. G. Canning to Sir C. Bagot. Sir Foreign Office, February 5, 1823. WITH respect to my despatch of the 31st December last, transmitting to your Excellency the copy of an instruction addressed to the. Duke of WeUington, as weU as a despatch from his Grace dated Verona, the 29th November last, both upon the subject of the Russian Ukase of September 1821, I have now to inclose to your ExceUency the copy of a note which has been addressed to me by Count Lieven, expressing His Imperial Majesty's wish to enter into some amicable arrangement for ~1 528 bringing this subject to a satisfactory termination, and requesting that your Excellency may be furnished with the necessary powers to enter into negotiation for that purpose with His Imperial Majesty's Ministers at St. Petersburgh. I avail myself of the opportunity of a Russian courier (of whose departure Count Lieven has only just "apprised me) to send this note to your Excellency, and to desire that your Excellency will proceed to open the discussion with tiife Russian Minister upon the basis of the instruction to the Duke of Wellington. I wiU not faU to transmit to your Excellency full powers for the conclusion of an agreement upon this subject, by a messenger whom I will dispatch to you as soon, as I shall have collected any further information which it may be expedient to furnish to your ExceUency, or to found any further instruction upon that may be necessary for your guidance in this important negotiation. I am, &c. (Signed) GEO. CANNING. Inclosure 11 in No. 382. Mr. Lyall to Mr. 6r. Canning. Sir, Ship-owners' Society, New Broad Street, November 19, 1823. IN the month of June last you were pleased to honour me with an interview on the subject of the Russian Ukase prohibiting foreign vessels from touching at or approaching the Russian establishments along the north-west coast of America therein mentioned, when you had the goodness to inform me that a representation had been made to that Government, and that you had reason to believe that the Ukase would not be acted upon; and very shortly after this communication I was informed, on what I considered undoubted authority, that the Russian Government had consented to withdraw that unfounded pretension. The Committee of this Society being about to make their annual Report to the ship-owners at large, it would be satisfactory to them to be able to state therein that official advices have been received from St. Petersburgh that the Ukase had been annulled; and should that be the case, I have to express the hope of the Committee to be favoured with a communication from you to that effect. I have, &c. (Signed) GEORGE LTALL, Chairman of Ship-owners' Committee. Inclosure 12 in No. 382. Lord F. Conyngham to Mr. Lyall. Sir, Foreign Office, November 26, 1823. I AM directed by Mr. Secretary Canning to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of the 19th instant, expressing a hope that the Ukase of September 1821 had been annulled. Mr. Canning cannot authorize me to state to you in distinct terms that the Ukase has been annulled, because the negotiation to which it gave rise is still pending, embracing as it does many points of great intricacy as well as importance. But I am directed by Mr. Canning to acquaint you that orders have been sent out by the Court of St. Petersburgh to their Naval Commanders calculated to prevent any collision between Russian ships and those of other nations; and in effect suspending the U^ase of September 1821. I am, &c.j (Signed) F. CONTNGHAM. Inclosure 13 in No. 382. Mr. G. Canning to Sir C. Bagot. (Extract.) Foreign Office, January 20, 1824. A LONG period has elapsed since I gave your Excellency reason to expect additional instructions for your conduct in the negotiation respecting the Russian Ukase of 1821, ; *JprThat expectation was held out in the beUef that I should have to instruct you to combine your proceedings with those of the American Minister, and the framing.she*, instructions was, of necessity, delayed until Mr. Rush should be in possession of the intentions of his Government upon the subject. * * * " * * * It remains, therefore, only for me to direct your ExceUency to resume your negotiation with the Court of St. Petersburgh at the point at which it was suspended in consequence of the expected accession of the United States, and to endeavour to bring it as speedily as possible to an amicable and honourable conclusion. The questions at issue between Great Britain and Prussia are short and simple. The Prussian Ukase contains two objectionable pretensions: first, an extravagant assumption of maritime supremacy; secondly, an unwarranted claim of territorial- dominion. . As to the first, the disavowal of Russia is, in substance, aU that we could desire; Nothing remains for negotiation on that head but to clothe that disavowal in precise and satisf actory terms. We would much rather that those terms should be suggested by Russia herself than have the air of pretending to dictate them. Tou wiU, therefore, request Count Nesselrode to furnish you with his notion of such a declaration on this point as may be satisfactory to your Government. That declaration may be made the preamble of the Convention of Limits. ****** Inclosure 14 in No 382. Mr. G. Canning to Sir C. Bagot. (Extract.) Foreign Office, July 24, 1824. THE " Projet" of a Convention, which is inclosed in my No. 26, having been communicated by me to Count Lieven, with a request that his ExceUency would note any points in it upon which he conceived any difficulty likely to arise, or any explanation to be necessary, I have received from his- Excellency the Memorandum a copy of which is herewith inclosed. Tour Excellency wiU observe that there are but two points which have struck Count Lieven as susceptible of any question: the first, the assumption of the base of the mountains, instead of the summit, as the line of boundary; the second, the extension of the right of navigation of the Pacific to the sea bevond Behring's Straits. ****** As to the second point, it is, perhaps, as Count Lieven remarks, new. But it is to be remarked, in return, that the circumstances under which this additional security is required wUl be new also. By the territorial demarcation agreed to in this " Projet," Russia wiU become possessed, in acknowledged sovereignty, of both sides of Behring's Straits. The Power which could think of making the Pacific a mare clausum may not unnaturaUy be supposed capable of a disposition to apply the same character to a strait comprehended between two shores of which it becomes the undisputed owner. But the shutting up of Behring's Straits, or the power to shut them up hereafter, would be a thing not to be tolerated by England. Nor could we submit to be excluded, either positively or constructively, from a ! sea in which the skill and science of our seamen has been and is stiU employed in enterprises interesting, not to this country alone, but the whole civUized world. The protection given by the Convention to the American coasts of each Power may (if it is thought necessary) be extended in terms to the coasts of the Russian Asiatic territory; but in some way or other, if not in the form now presented, the free navigation of Behring's Straits, a"nd of the seas beyond them, must be secured to us. Inclosure 15 in No. 382. Mr. G. Canning to Mr. S. Canning. (Extract.) Foreign Office, December 8,1824. HIS Majesty having been graciously pleased to name you his Plenipotentiary for concluding and signing with the Russian Government a Convention, for terminating the discussions which have arisen out of the promulgation of the Russian Ukase [128] 3 T 530 of 1821, and for settling the respective territorial claims of Great Britain and Russia on the north-west coast of America, I have received His Majesty's commands to direct you to repair to St. Petersburgh for that purpose, and to furnish you with the necessary instructions for terminating the long-protracted negotiation. The correspondence which has already passed upon this subject has been submitted to your perusal. And I inclose you a copy— 1. Of the I Projet" which Sir Charles Bagot was authorized to conclude and sign some months ago, and which we had every reason to expect would have been entirely satisfactory to the Russian Government. 2. Of a | Contre-Projet" drawn up by the Russian Plenipotentiaries, and presented to Sir Charles Bagot at their last meeting before Sir Charles Bagot's departure from St. Petersburgh. 3. Of a despatch from Count Nesselrode, accompanying the transmission of the I Contre-Projet" to Count Lieven. In that despatch, and in certain marginal annotations upon the copy of the | Projet," are assigned the reasons of the alterations proposed by the Russian Plenipotentiaries. In considering the expediency of admitting or rejecting the proposed alterations, it will be convenient to follow the Articles of the Treaty in the order in which they stand in the English " Projet." Tou will observe in the first place that it is proposed by the Russian Plenipotentiaries entirely to change that order, and to transfer to the latter part of the instrument the Article which has hitherto stood first in the " Projet." To that transposition we cannot agree, for the very reason which Count Nesselrode alleges in favour of it, viz., that the " ficonomie," or arrangement of the Treaty, ought to have reference to the history of the negotiation. The whole negotiation grows out of the Ukase of 1821. So entirely and absolutely true is this proposition, that the settlement of the limits of the respective possessions of Great Britain and Russia on the north-west coast of America was proposed by us only as a mode of facilitating the adjustment of the difference arising from the Ukase, by enabUng the Court of Russia, under cover or the more comprehensive arrangement, to withdraw, with less appearance of concession, the offensive pretensions of that Edict. It is comparatively indifferent to us whether we hasten or postpone all questions respecting the limits of territorial possession on the Continent of America; but the pretensions of the Russian Ukase of 1821 to exclusive dominion over the Pacific could not continue longer unrepealed without compelling us to take some measure of public and effectual remonstrance against it. Tou will therefore take care, in the first instance, to repress any attempt to give this change to the character of the negotiation ; and will declare without reserve that the point to which alone the solicitude of the British Government and the jealousy of tbe British nation attach any great importance is the doing away (in a manner as little disagreeable to Russia as possible) of the effect of the Ukase of 1821. That this Ukase is not acted upon, and that instructions have been long ago sent by the Russian Government to their cruizers in the Pacific to suspend the execution of its provisions, is true; but a private disavowal of a published claim is no security against the revival of that claim : the suspension of the execution of a principle may be perfectly compatible with the continued maintenance of the principle itself, and when we have seen iu the course of this negotiation that the Russian claim to the possession of the coast of America down to latitude 59° rests, in fact, on no other ground than the presumed acquiescence of the nations of Europe in the provisions of an Ukase published by the Emperor Paul in the year 1800, against which it is affirmed that no public remonstrance was made, it becomes us to be exceedingly careful that we do not, by a similar neglect on the present occasion, allow a simUar presumption to be raised as to an acquiescence in the Ukase of 1821. The right of the subjects of His Majesty to navigate freely in the Pacific cannot be held as matter of indulgence from any Power. Having once been pubUcly questioned, it must be publicly acknowledged. We do not desire that any distinct reference should be made to the Ukase of 1821; but we do feel it necessary that the statement of our right should be clear and positive, and that it should stand forth in the Convention in the place which properly belongs to it, as a plain and substantive stipulation, and not be brought in as an incidental consequence of other arrangements to'which we attach comparatively Utile importance. This stipulation stands in the front of the Convention concluded between Russia 531 and the United States of America; and we see no reason why, upon similar claims, we should not obtain exactly the Uke satisfaction. For reasons of the same nature we cannot consent that the Uberty of navigation through Behring's Straits should be stated in the Treaty as a boon from Russia. The* tendency of sush a statement would be to give countenance to those claims of exclusive jurisdiction against which we, on our own behalf, and on that of the whole civiUzed world, protest. No specification of this sort is found in the Convention with the United States of America; and yet it cannot be doubted that the Americans consider themselves as secured in the right of navigating Behring's Straits and the sea beyond them. | It cannot be expected that England should receive as a boon that which the United States hold as a right so unquestionable as not to be worth recording. Perhaps the simplest course, after aU, wUl be to substitute, for aU that part of the " Projet" and | Contre-Projet" which relates to maritime rights, and to navigation, the first two Articles of the Convention already concluded by the Court of St. Petersburgh with the United States of America, in the order in which they stand in that Convention. Russia cannot mean to give to the United States of America what she withholds from us, nor to withhold from us anything that she has consented to give to the United States. The uniformity of stipulations in pari materid gives clearness and force to both, arrangements, and wiU establish that footing of equaUty between the several Contracting Parties which it is most desirable should exist between three Powers whose interests come so nearly in contact with each other in a part of the globe in which no other Power is concerned. This, therefore, is what I am to instruct you to propose at once to the Russian Minister as cutting short an otherwise inconvenient discussion. This expedient wiU dispose of Article I of the " Projet," and of Articles V and . VI of the " Contre-Projet." The next Articles relate to the territorial demarcation. With regard to the port of Sitka or New Archangel, the offer came originally from Russia, but we are not disposed to object to the restriction which she now appUes to it. We are content that the port shall be open to us for ten years, provided only that if any other nation obtains a more extended term, the Uke term shall he extended to ■us also. We are content also to assign the period of ten years for the reciprocal Uberty of access and commerce with each other's territories, which stipulation may be best stated precisely in the terms of Article IV of the American Convention. These, I think, are the only points in which alterations are required by Russia, and we have no other to propose. A | Projet," such as it will stand according to the observations of this despatch, is inclosed, which you wiU understand as furnished to you as a guide for the drawing up of the Convention; but not as prescribing the precise form of words, nor fettering your discretion as to any alterations, not varying from the substance of these instructions. It wiU, of course, strike the Russian Plenipotentiaries that by the adoption of the American Article respecting navigation, &c, the provision for an exclusive fishery of two leagues from the coasts of our respective possessions falls to the ground. But the omission is, in truth, immaterial. The law of nations assigns the exclusive sovereignty of one league to each Power off its own coasts, without any specific stipulation, and though Sir Charles Bagot was authorized to sign the Convention with the specific stipulation of two leagues, in ignorance of what had been decided in the American Convention at the time, yet, after that Convention has been some months before the world, and after the opportunity of reconsideration has been forced upon us by the act of Russia herself, Ave cannot now consent, in negotiating de novo, to a stipulation which, whUe it is absolutely unimportant to any practical good, would appear to establish a contract between the United States and us to our disadvantage. Count Nesselrode himself has frankly admitted that it was natural that we should expect, and reasonable that we should receive, at the hands of Russia, equal measure, in aU respects, with the United States of America. It remains only, in recapitulation, to remind you of the origin and principles of .this whole negotiation. 002 It is not, on our part, essentially a negotiation about limits. It is a demand:6f" the repeal of an offensive and unjustifiable abrogation of exclusive jurisdiction over ah ocean of unmeasured extent; but a demand, quaUfied and mitigated in its manner, in order that its justice may be acknowledged and satisfied without soreness or humiliation, on the part of Russia. We negotiate about territoiy to cover the remonstrance upon principle. But any attempt to take undue advantage of this voluntary facility we must oppose. If the present " Projet" is agreeable to Russia, we are ready to conclude and sign the Treaty. If the territorial arrangements are not satisfactory, we are ready to postpone them, and to conclude and sign the essential part—that which relates to navigation alone, adding an Article stipulating to negotiate about territorial limits hereafter. But we are not prepared to defer any longer the settlement of that essential part of the question; and if Russia will neither sign the whole Convention nor that essential part of it, she must not take it amiss that we resort to some mode of recording, in the face of the world, our protest against the pretensions of the Ukase of 1821, and of effectually securing our own interests against the possibility of its future operations. Inclosure 16 in No. 382. Mr. S. Canning to Mr. G. Canning. Sir, St. Petersburgh, February 17 (March 1), 1825. BT the messenger Latchford I have the honour to send you the accompanying Convention between His Majesty and the Emperor of Russia respecting the Pacific Ocean and north-west coast of America, which, according to your instructions, I concluded and signed last night with the Russian Plenipotentiaries. The alterations which, at.their instance, I have admitted into the "Projet," such as I presented it to them at first, will be found, I conceive, to be in strict conformity with the spirit and substance of His Majesty's commands. The order of the two main subjects of our negotiation, as stated in the preamble of the Convention, is preserved in the Articles of that instrument. The line of demarcation along the strip of land on the north-west coast of America, assigned to Russia, is laid down in the Convention agreeably *to your directions, notwithstanding some difficulties raised on this point, as well as on-that which regards the order of the Articles, by the Russian Plenipotentiaries. The instance in which you will perceive that I have most availed myself of the -latitude afforded by your instructions to bring the negotiation to a satisfactory and prompt conclusion is the division of the Illrd Article of the new "Projet," as it stood when I gave it in,-into the Illrd, IVth, and Vth Articles of the Convention signed by the Plenipotentiaries. . This change was suggested by the Russian Plenipotentiaries, and at first it.was suggested in a shape which appeared to me objectionable; but the Articles, as they are now drawn up, I humbly conceive to be such as wiU not meet with your disapprobation. The second paragraph of the IVth Article had already appeared parenthetically in the Illrd Article of the | Projet," and the whole of the IVth Article is limited in its signification and connected with the Article immediately preceding it by the first paragraph. With respect to Behring's Straits, I am happy to have it in' my power to assuro you. on the joint authority of the Russian Plenipotentiaries, that the Emperor of Russia has no intention whatever of maintaining any exclusive claim to the navigation of those straits, or of the seas to the north of them. It cannot be necessary, under these circumstances, to trouble you with a more particular account of the several conferences which I have held with the Russian ■Plenipotentiaries, and it is but justice to state that I have found them disposed., throughout this latter stage of the negotiation, to treat the matters under discussion with fairness and liberality. As two originals of the Convention prepared for His Majesty's Government are signed by the Plenipotentiaries, I propose to leave one of them with Mr. Ward for the archives of the Embassy. v I have, &c. (Signed) STRATFORD CANNING. —
Other Copies: http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/70481354
Correspondence
English
Vancouver : University of British Columbia Library
London : Harrison & Sons
Images provided for research and reference use only. For permission to publish, copy, or otherwise distribute these images please contact digital.initiatives@ubc.ca.
Original Format: University of British Columbia. Library. Rare Books and Special Collections. JX238 .F83 1890
Bering Sea controversy
Seizure of vessels and cargoes
Sealing
Correspondence respecting the Behring sea seal fisheries : 1886-90
Text