The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-07-24

Alaska fur seal fisheries during the year
1856. The present customs and rights had
been established and enjoyed either by
| Russia or the United States for nearly 4
century. The two nations were the only
| powers that owned foot of land on the
continent that bordered on the islands in
Guided within Behring waters where seals
resort to breed. This peaceful and secure
field of labor, whose benefits were so eauit-
ably shared by the native Aleuts of tue
Pribyioo islands and by the United States.
certain Canadian vessels in 1886 asserted
their right to enter. and by q ruthless
course to destroy the fisheries, and with
them destroy also the resulting industries
so valuable to the people.
The United States at once proceeded to
check this movement, which. unchecked.
would do irreparahle harm. Itwas cause
OF unfeigned surprise to the United States
that her majestys government should i'm
mediateiy interfere to defend and encour-
age, by defending the course of
the Canadians in disturbing an
industry which had been carefully
developed for more than ninety years
under the fiags of Russia and the United
States, and developed in such q manner as
not TO interfere with the public rights or
private industries of any people or any
other person.
so great has been the injury to the fish,
cries from this irregular and destructive
slaughter of seals in the open waters of
Behring sea by Canadian vessels that,
whereas the government had allowed 1O0.-
600 seals to be taken annually for series
OF years, it Is now compelled to reduce that
number to 60, ,O00 II the four years of this
violation Of natural law and neighborly
rights has reduced the annual slaughter OF
seal by 40 per cent, it is easy to see how
short will be the period required to work
destruction of the fisheries.
The ground upon which her rnaIesty's
government justifes or at least defends the
course OF the Canadian vessels rests upon
the fact that they are committing their acts
OF destruction on the high seas 1t is
doubtful whether her majesty's govern
ment would abide by this rule, if an at
tempt were made to interfere with the
pearl fisheries of Ceylon. which extend
more than twenty miles from the shore
line and have been enjoyed by England
without molestation ever since their acqui-
sition. So well recognized is the British
ownership of those fisheries, regardless of
the limit OF three miles. that her majesty's
government feels authorized to sell the
pearl fisheries right from year to year to
the highest bidder. Nor is it credible
that mode of fisheries on the grand banks,
altogether practicable but highly destruct.
i've, should be justified or even permitted
by Great Britain on the plea that the
vicious acts are committed more than
three miles from shore He mentions
vn mi 70 nc rxa NJ hos
DDS. and says:
Does her majesty,s government seriously
maintain that the law Of nations is powerless 10
prevent such violation of the common rights Of
manf Are the supporters OF justice in all ma
nons to be declared incompetent to prevent
wrongs or customs SO destructive in the jude.
ment of this government? Is not this lawlees~
ness one step beyond that which her raa,esty's
government has taken In this contention, and
does not piracy find its jurisdiction? This gov
ernment has been ready TO concede much in or
der TO adjust all differences of view aud has
in the judgment OF the president. already pro-
posed solution not Only equitable, but gener-
ous The president now awaits with deep i'm
tefest, not unmixed with solicitation, any prop
osition for reasonable adjustment which her
majestys government may submit. The forcible
resistance to which this government is con-
strained in Behriug sea is. in the presidents
judgment. demanded not Only by the necessity
of defending the traditional and long-estab-
lshed rights of the United States, but also the
rights OF good government and good morals the
world over.
In this contention the government of the
United States has no occasion and no desire to
withdraw or modify the position which it has at
any time maintained against the claims of the
imperial government of Russia. The United
States win 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 20
exercise In those possessions any power or au-
tnority other than it WAS willing to coifcede the
imperial government when its sovereignty was
extended to them.
On April 30. Pouncefote writes Blaine, in
answer to his invitation for q counter-pro-
posal tor settlement. that as the sole OBJ
ject of the negotiations was the preserva-
ton of the seal fur species, regard
less of advantage to any particular
nation or private interest, it would be
strange if there should be failure to devise
means of solving the difficulties which had
arisen. In view OF the divergent views held,
no solution wouid satisfy public opinion
in Canada or Great Britain without full
inquiry by mixed commission of experts.
Meanwhile, he was prepared to recon-
mend to bis government Ger tain provision
al and precautional measures, to remove
apprehension of depletion of the fur
species, pending the report of the commits
sion. He then cites authorities declaring
that the number OF seals is on the increase.
The minister says:
But IN order to quiet al apprehension on that
score would propose the following provisional
regulate MS First, that pelagic sealing should
be prohibited in Behring sea. the Sea of okhotsk
aud adjoining waters during the months of
June, October. November and December. which
may be termed the migratory periods OF the
fur seal.
second-That all scaling vessels be prohibited
from approaching the breeding islands within
radius of ten miles.
The minister then embodies the draft of
an agreement for a mixed commission to
cover these and other points and report
The Marquis of Salisbury. in letter to
the British minister, after saying that the
negotiations between Secretary Blaine ana
the British minister afford strong hope
that the question is in fair way towards
a satisfactory adjustment. undertakes to
reply to Blaine's arguments relative to the
statement that the seizures are justified by
the fact that Canadian sealers engage in q
pursuit contra tonos D'ores. The marquis
says:
tits obvious that two oquestions are involved;
First, that the pursuit and killing OF fur
seals in certain parts Of the open sea Is, from
the point of view OF international Law. m Of
fence contra b0Ros msores; second, whether, III
such be the case, this iustifies seizure on the
high seas and subsequent eon6scafiou In time
| Of peace. of the private vessels OF friendly
| nation.
| It's an axiom Of international maritime Law
| that such action Is only admissible In the case
Il IN v,f,rx n \ nj