St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1890-07-24

ouC y HlGeu OldlcS COulu duuiI IiO pau
of these claims. He also cites the case
show that the right of fishing thus
asserted included the right of killing
fur-bearing animals. The brig was
forced by an armed Russian naval
vessel to leave the waters. He also
argues 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 re-
gard themselves as purchasing mo-
nopoly. Having dealt with fur-bearing
animals he went on to treat OF fisheries,
and after abiding to the presence OF
different species of whales in the vi
cinity of the AleutianS said: mo sea
is now mare clausum: all of these may
be pursued by ship under any flag, ex-
cept directly on the coast or within its
territorial limits" The marquis also
says that Mr.. Blaine must have been
misinformed respecting the uninter-
rupted possession of the United States
from 1867 to 1886, and submits extracts
from reports of United States officers
to show that during that time British
vessels were engaged at intervals
in the fur seal fisheries with the cog
niZance of the United States govern
ment. He further states that the whal-
ers have not heretofore engaged in seal
ing because of lack of time, and finds
it unnecessary to deal with the question
of extinction of the seal through pelaglc
sealing, as it is proposed to examine
the subject by committee appointed
by the two governments. He admits
hof IF oil cnoh cno1InCr ctOnnn6 tho
seal would multiply at an even more
cannot admit that this is 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.
Says the Marquis, in conclusion: 1.-THE
negotiations now being carried out at
Washington prove the readiness of her
majestY's government to consider
whether any special international agree
ment is necessary for the protection of
the fur seal industry. In its absence
they are unable to admit that the case
put forward on behalf of the United
States affords any sufficient justifica-
ton for the forcible action already
taken by them against peaceable sub
JectS of her majesty, engaged in lawful
operations on the high seas. 1.-The presi-
dent" Says MI. Blaine, "iS persuaded that
all friendly nations will cOncede to the
United States the same rights and priv
ileges OH the lands and in the waters of
Alaska which the same friendly nations
always concede to the empire of Rus
Sia." Her majeSty'S government have
no difficulty in making such cOnceS-
sion. In strict accordance with the
views which, previous to the present
controversy, were consistently and sue
cessfully 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 nav
igation and fishing III waters which.
previous to their own acquisition of
Alaska, the United States declared to be
free and open to all foreign vessels.
In conclusion he proposes, in behalf
of the president, that her maJesty's gov
eminent agree not to permit the vessels
(Which in his Judgment do injury to the
property of the United States) to enter
the Behring sea for this season, in order
bldU lllllO uldy DC OCOutSo 1Ol iiSS7OotN
ton that shall not be disturbed by un-
toward events, or unduly influenced by
popular agitation. Sir Julian, June II,
writes Mr.. Blaine that he has informed
Lord Salisbury that Secretary Blaine
could not give assurance that British
sealing vessels would not be interfered
with during the negotiations, and eX-
presses the hope that the decision is
not final, and that while there is yet
time the commanders of the United
States revenue cruisers will be in
structed to abstain. June Ia, how
ever, the minister with regret failing
to secure favorable response, presents
the formal protest of the British gov
eminent. The minister next, June
9th, replies to Secretary Blaine's prop
osition looking to a proclamation by
her majeSty'S government that British
vessels shall not enter Behring sea the
coming season. The minister writes
that Lord Salisbury says that the presi-
dents request presents constitutional
difficulties which would preclude her
majesty's government from acceding to
it, except as part of general scheme
for the settlement of the Behring sea
controversy, and on certain conditions
which would justly the assumption by
her majesty'S government OF the grave
responsibility involved in the proposal.
These conditions are:
First-That the two governments agree
forthwith to refer to arbitration the question
of the legality of the action of the United
States government in selling or otherwise
interfering with British vessels engaged in
the Behring sea- outside OF territorial waters,
during the years OF 1885,. 1881 ana 1859;
Second-That pending the award, all in
reference with British sealing vessels shall
absolutely cease.
Third-That the United States government.
if the award should be adverse to them on
the question of legal right will compensate
British subjects for the losses which they
may sustain by reason OF their compliance
with the British proclamation.
Such, says the minister, are the three
conditions on which it is indispensable,
in the view of her Majesty's. govern
ment, that the issue of the proposed
proclamation should be based. The
thirtieth and last letter of the mass of
correspondence which would, If printed
entire, fill over twenty newspaper col
umns, was addressed by Mr.. Blaine 10
Sir Julian Pauncefote from Bar HarbOr
last Saturday. In it the secretary says:
II am instructed by the president to say
that the United States is willing to consider
all the proceedings of April Is, 1886, as can
celied. so tar as American rights are con-
cerned. This government will ask Great
Britain to adhere only to the agreement
made between Lord Salisbury and Mr..
Phelps on the 18th of February, 1888. That
was an agreement made directly between the
two governments, and did not include the
rights of Russia Asking Lord Salisbury to
adhere to the agreement of Feb. %. we leave
the agreement of April 16 to be maintained,
if maintained at all. by Russia, for whose
cause and for whose advantage it was par
tioularlv DESIGNED -
Mr.. Blaine also refers to Lord Sails
bury's statement that political events in
the United States had caused an inter-
ruption of negotiations, and not a
Canadian objection, and closes the
voluminiouS correspondence as follows !:
II am justified IN assuming that Lord Sails
bury cannot recur to the remark of Mr.. Phelps
as one of the reasons for breaking off the
negotiations, because the negotiation was in
actual progress for more than four months
after the remark was made and Mr.. Phelps
himself took large part in it. Upon this
recital of facts am unable to recall or in any
way to qualify the statement which made in
my note of June 4th to the effect that
Lord Salisbury abruptly closed the negotiation
because the Canadian government objected
and that he assigned no other reason
whatever. Lord Salisbury expresses the be-
lief that even if the view l have taken of
these transactions be accurate they would
L. IL r.