Sacramento daily record-union. [volume] (Sacramento [Calif.]) 1875-1891, 1891-01-06
MORE HOSTILE REINFoRCEMENTs.
EDgland's Proposal to Use Arbitration is
Rejected,


WASHINGTON, January 5th-The President to-
day transmitted to the House further CORE
sponderce on the subject OF the Behring Sea
eontIoTersy between the United States and
a letter from Salisbury to Pauncefote dated
August ., 1890 and one from Secretary Blaine 10
the same Ministers, dated December 18th last
Salisbury's letter is confined to the discussion
OF the Russian lease and treaty of lS25. He ar
CUES that Blaine miSinterpreted adams posi-.
ton, and declares that the history of the case
shows: First-That England always denied
Russia's claim of maritime jurisdiction of the
Behrlng Sea; that the Convention of 1926 was a
remuneration of that claim, and that the Beh.
ring Sea has not been known by that name but
as part OF the Pacific Ocean. He closes with
staten ent that If differences still exist his Gov
ernment is ready for an impartial arbitration
by methods TO be agreed upon in concert with
Blaine.
Blaine's letter begins with an insistance upon
the correctness of the position assumed by the
United states. He believes the controversy turns
upon one point-whethtr the phrase Pacific
ocean, used in the treaties OF 1924 IS included
the Behripg sea, as contended by Great Britain.
If the United States can prove the contrary her
case is complete and undeniable Therefore
Blaine enter into an exhaustive argument,
based on Bancrotts history and maps to show
that Adams and his contemporaries had dis
tinct understanding that the phrase Pacific
ocean excluded the waters of Benring sea-
then known to all the word as the Sea of Kam-
schatka.
The Secretary points to the large wealth of
the Russian American Company which he says
would have been carelessly thrown away by the
Russian nobility in the phrase which merged
the Behring sea in the Pacific ocean. He cites
the long years of abstinence from the seal waters
by adventurous people of the United States and
Great Britain as presumption of the lack of
right to enter. AS stronger evidence of his
correctness Blame cites the protocols of the
treaty of 1924 to show Russia's re inquishment
of jurisdiction applied only to territory between
the fftieth and sixtieth degrees; also. an ex-
planatory note from Russia to Adams in 1924
positively excepting the Aleutian islands aud
county north of 39o 3 from the concessions 10
the United States of the right to fish and trade
He also cites the action of Great Britain ex-
cluding vessels from waters within eight
leagues of st Helena, when Napoleon was con-
fined there, and again refers TO the protection
exercised over the Ceylon pearl fisheries by
Great Britain, saying that he is willing to accept
fisheries. He speaks of the enormous injury in
ficted by vessels under the British flag upon
the United States fisheries, and suggests that
she send an intelligent commission TO the seal
islands. Again, he objects TO the form proposed
OF arbitration, and says it will amount to some
thing tangible if Great Britain consents to arbi-
trate the real questions discussed tor the last
by Russia IN Behring Sea? How far were they
conceded by Great Britain? Was Behring Sea
included in the Pacific Ocean? Did not the
United States acquire all RuSsia's rights? What
are the present rights of the United States and
II the concurrence of Great Britain was found
necessary, then what shall be the protected
limits and the loose season? Secretary Blaine
Claimed the Behring Sea to be a closed sea, and
quotes Minister Phelps, in 1855, where he says
the question is not applicable to the present
case.