The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1886-09-13
AT WASHINGTON.
The Department of State Processes to Know
Nothing OF II,

Nothing oft
WASHINGTON, D. O., Sept, ll.--Not a lit
tle autter was caused by the report that
Canada, at the ipsIigation Of the British
Home Government, had demanded the
immediate and unconditional release Of
the vessels siezed in Alaska waters for
the alleged violation OF the fishery laws.
At the State Department to-day it
was denied that any such de-
mand had been made. This would
seem to dispose OF the matter. 1t
would be accepted as final but for the very
strong probability that such q demand is
likely to be made at any time In the near
future. Tle ground for the seizure Sf
these vessels Is by no means well defined.
All the facts concerning ths case have not
yet been reported. II Is a Treasury De.
pArtmeAt affair thus far, and 1t is ex,reme-
lyLoublt whetn9r the 80 Ire cAu bs jliti.
fed. The three.mie limit business Ia at
the bottom OF this, as Of the Canadian At
lantic fishery difficulty.
In this Case another element Of uncer.
talnty is added. In the trouble with New
England fishermen the question Ia wheth.
er the three-mlle.limit Of the treaty means
from headland to headland. The Ameri-
cans claim 1t Is three miles from the
shore line following the indentalion OF the
coast. The same claim is put up In this
case, and ID applied also to the Aleutian
islands Of the Alaskan archipelago. Now
the Bshring Sea Is filed with barren
islands, valuable only for the seal, and the
whole was included In our purchase from
Russia, We claim that three.lAile limit
not only applies TO the coast line, but
TO each one OF these islands within the
main shores as transferred by Russia. II
the headline to headline theory Of Canada
were applied TO the Alaskan coast 1t would
include half oil the Behring Sea, The
question arises whether Russia had the
right 10 transfer any such extent OF inland
waters, although Russia stlll owns the
adj AGENT headland. The right ofall coun.
tries to enter the Gull Of st. Lawrence is
uncontested and inContestible. Wher-
ever there are waters extending beyond
three miles from shore TO shore they are
open and free to the world, according TO
our own theory.
There Is no particular value to this right
oi entry on tbs Alaskan coast unless 1t
carries with 1t the right TO fish for seals.
AS seals cannot be caught three miles
from shore, the question in the case OF the
captured vessels will scarcely raise the
more general one OF the right to free navi.
CATION Of the waters. The latter cannot
be safely claimed by the United states.
But our exclusive right 10 the islands
within those waters has not yst been dis.
puted. 1t Is claimed that the seized yes.
sells had on board seal pelts, which seal
must have been caught on American
territory contrary to law. On the Allan
tic coast the fishermen must be caught in
the act Of fishing or preparing to ash with.
In tho limits.
Buying bait and getting other supplies
is construed IS preparing TO fish. But
fish can be caught outside OF the three
mile limit. Unlike this, seal cannot be
caught, and having seal pets on board OF
an unlicensed vessel would be prlma iacia
evidence that they were caught in viola
ton Of law. The Canadian claim will be
that the vessels must be seized In the act
Of taking seal within the limit. This Is
| the whole case,