The Portland daily press., 1891-05-08
lhSlKUCllNG SALISBURY.
Lessons in History and Geography for
the British Premier.
Mr.. Blaiae's Last Letter on the Beh-
ring Sea Dispute.
His LOrdship's Demand for Damages
Promptly Answered
And the American Case Again Viger.
Ously Presented.
John Bull Furnishes His American
Cousins Another Argument.

Cousins Another Argument.
| WASHINGTON, May THE following
note. in addition to the correspondence,
which has already passed in relation to the
Behring Sea controversy. is made public:
MR.. BLAINE TO SIR JULIAN PAUNCEFoTE
| April IA, 1891.
| Sir - The notifications Lord Salisbury
| suggests in the questions for arbitration d(
| not wholly meet the views of the President
But the President changes the text of the
third and fifth in such manner, it Is hoped
as Will result In an agreement between the
two governments. While Lord Salisbury
| suggests different mode of procedure from
| that embodied in the sixth question the
President does not understand him actually
TO object to the question and he therefore as.
sumes that 1t Is agreed to. The six ques'
tions as now proposed by the President are
| as follows:
First-What exclusive Jurisdiction In the sea
now known as Behring sea. and what exclusive
rights in the seal fisheries therein. did Russia as
sert and exercise prior and up to the time of the
cesslon OF Alaska to the United States?
| Second-How far were these claims to jurisdic.
tion as to the seal fisheries recognized and con
eeded by Great Britain?
Ihird-Was the body Of water now known as
Behring sea included In the phrase, Pacific
Ocean," as used In the treaty of 1926 between
Great Britain and Russia, and what rights If any
clsed By Russia after the said treaty?
Fourth-Did not all the rights Of Russia as to
jurisdiction and as to the seal fisheries ia Behring
Sea, east of the water boundary described 10 the
treaty between the United States and Russia of
March 80, 1857, pass unimpaired to the United
Fifth-Has the UAited States any right, and, il
So what right OF protection of property in the fur
fcf6 a
the ordinary three mile limit?
Slxth-If the determination of the foregoing
questions shall leave the subject In such posi-
tton that the concurrence of Great Britain is nee
essary ln prescribing regulations for killing the
iur seal In any part OF the waters of Behrng Sea,
then 1t shall be further determined: First, how
far. If at ALL outside the ordinary territorial limits
ills necessary that the United States should
seal for the time living upon the Islands Of the
United States and feeding therefrOm; second,
whether closed season: during which the killing
ordinary territorial limits shall be prohibited is
necessary to save the seal fishing industry, so
valuable and important to mankind, from deterio.
ration or destruction; and, if so, third, what
months or parts of months should be included in
such season, and over what waters it should ex-
tend.
The President does not object to the addi-
tional question respecting the alleged dam.
ages to English ships, proposed by Lord
Salisbury, if one condition can be added
namely: That after the issues of arbitration
are joined, if the United States shall prevail,
all seals taken by Canadian vessels during
the period shall be paid for at the ordinary
price for which the skins are sold. This
seems to the President to be the complement
OF Lord Salisbury's proposition.
In the first paragraph of Lord Salisbury's
dispatch Of February 81, he makes the fol-
lowing declaration:
1t Is now quite clear that the advisors of the
President do not claim Behring sea as a mare
cLdlSltnl and indeed, they repudlate that conten-
tion in express terms.
Lord Salisbury's expression is put in such
form as to imply that the United States
had hitherto been resting its contention up
on the fact that Behring Sea was mare
ctdusltna LII that is his intention, it would
have been well for His Lordship to specify
wherein the United States ever made that
assertion. The emphatic denial in my dis
patch of December 18th last was intended to
put an end to the iteration of the charge and
eliminate 1t from the current discussion.
Lord Salisbury complains that did not deal
with certain protests, written by Lord Lon
donderry and the Duke of Wellington in
1922. which he before quoted. If he will re-
cur to the 9th page of my dispatch of Decem
ber 18th he will observe specially dealt with
these; l maintained and, think, proved
from the text that there was not a single
word in those protests referring to Behring
Sea, but they referred in the language of the
Duke of Wellington on the 18th of October,
1922. only to lands extending along the
to latitude 60o north"
In the first paragraph of Lord Londonder-
ry's protest of January IS, 1922, addressed to
Count Lieven, Russia. he alluded to the mat
ters In dispute as especially connected with
the territorial rights of the Russian crown
on the northwest coast of America bordering
on the Pacific Ocean, and the commerce and
navigation of His Imperial Majesty's sub
jects in the seas adjacent thereto" From
these and other pertinent facts it is evident
that the protests of Lord Londonderry and
the Duke OF Wellington had nothing what
ever to do with the points now in issue be-
tween the American and British govern
ments concerning the waters of Behring sea-
They both referred, In different but substan-
TALLY identical phrases, to the territory
south OF the Alaskan peninsula, bordering
on the Pacific and geographically shut out
from Behring sea. l regret that my argu-
ments on point that Lord Salisbury consid-
cred of great importance should have es
capped His Lordship's notice.
In Lord SalisbuIy's Judgment. the conten-
tion Of the United States now rests wholly
upon the ukase of 1921 by the Emperor Alex
der of Russia. The United States has at no
time rested its argument solely on the ground
mentioned. This government regrets that
Lord Salisbury should have so misappre-
hended the American position as to limit its
basis OF right in Behring Sea to the ukase
of 1921. The United States has. among 9TH
er grounds, insisted. without recurring to
any of its inherited and superior rights in
Alaska, that this government has as full au-
thority Tor going beyond the three-mile line
in case 1t Is proved necessity, as Great Bri-
tain possesses. Two or three Instances of
the power which Great Britain exercises be-
yond the three-mile line have already been
quoted and have failed thus far to secnre
comment or explanation from Lord Sails
bury. Another case can be added, which.
perhaps, is still more to the point. Tn 1850
the British Parliament enacted a law.
the effect of which is fnlIv
outside the three mile line, the ParIiameaat u az
Of Great Britain attempted to control hodv
of water situated beyond the northeas astern
section Of Scotland. 2700 square miles in axl
tent. and to direct that certain methods Of
fishing snail not be used within that great
body OF water under prescribed penaltv
1t will be observed that the inhibition is not
alone against. British subjects, but against
''any person." "e"'no'
Mr.. Blaine quotes a pertinent section of
the parliamentary act in question: "a
If Great Britain may thus control an aroo
of 2700 square miles If ocean on the coast Of
Scotland, why may not the United Sta+es
prescribe space around the Prihvioff
islands, in which similar prohibitions nav
be enforced. 1t must not escape obseryation
that the area of water outside the three mile
limit ON the coast of Scotland, whose controI
is assumed by Great Britain is as lspae VI oa
found inside of line drawn from Cana cd
to Portland harbor, on the New England
esast
Lord Salisbury reasserts his conten,;o,
that the words the Pacific ocean. at the time
of the treaty between Russia and Great Rrit.
ain did include Behring sea. Undonhtodly,
the Pacific ocean includes Behrlng sea in thss
same way that the Atlantic ocean incindaS
the gulf of Mexico. yet 1t would be REGARDED
as very inaccurate statement to sav that
the Mississippi river flows into the Atlantic
ocean. think Lord Salisbury fails to recog.
nize the common distinction between "a :
lantic ocean" and "The waters of the Altar.
tic" While the Mexican gulf is moi not IasIt mart
of the Atlantic ocean, 1t would, / am spro p%t
comport with general usage to saw II 0I,e' be''
lopged to the waters of the Atlantic and nd
while Behring sea is not technicalIva ar, nart,
of theIPacific oceaD,tt undoubtedly belon9s ~
the waters of the Pacific. The English cbsn. W
mel would not ordinarily be understood Ia as
included In the term Atlantic ocean," One
would not say Dover or Calais Is on the coas
of the Atlantic ocean, yet Clearly Ss the
English channel belongs to the the
fact therefore. according tn tha rs.irre ~ ~, "