The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-02-05

THE BEHkiNG SEA QUEaIicN'
The effect OF the decision Of the Uniteu
states Supreme Court In the sayward case
o. the effect that the Alaskan court was "a
district court OF the United States" ana
that the supreme Court had right 20 ISSUE
a writ Of prohibition TO e. will be watched
with much interest both In the United states
AID in England. Phe status OF the case at
present Is that the Supreme Court has issued
an order 10 the Alaskan Court to show eau e
WHY the writ Of prohibition should not
issue. This will give Great Britain a right
In he heard. through Her Majesty's counsel,
t,ef,re the suprtme Court, and the Corrt
a,,cr hearing the argument, viii render
,,s decision. II that decision Is IN
favor Of Great Britan n, the writ VIII
issue prohibiting the Alaskan Court
fr,m proceeding further in the case oil the
British schooner Sayward, charged WIN
Illegally fishing for seals IN the ws'erso'
Bebring sea. and ordering her discharge,
and this will mean that, in the opinion oi
the highest judicial tribunal OF the Oui'cu
states. Behring sea is an open sea, ana as
| such the United states Will in future nave
TO regard it. If, on the other hand. the ue-
cisiOn should be in favor OF the Oni'eu
Estates. this country will continue to nam
tain that the sea IS "marc clausum," anu
will hold that position against all the world;
but the interesting question then TO arse
will be, "Wnl Great Britain, who Is not le-
gally bound by the decision Of the UnlRo
states courts, respect the decisIonT'
The chances are that she will. 1t was
that Government which first invoked the
medium Of our august tribunal 20 settle
this international question, and Mr. Caide-
ron Carlisle, in presenting his petition %
The Court, distinctly said that he had 0eeI
instructed 10 do 50 by Her MaJesty's Gov
eminent. Under these circumstances, Grea
Britain could not ignore with honor TN
decision Of the tribunal TO which she her
self appealed, and tits not at all likely ina
Lord Salisbury would countenance any
thing Of the sort. So far, then, as the tY'
countries directly interested in this particu
lar case are concerned, it is more tina
probable that the action OF the Court would
Z /
be final.
In addition to the objection that the decii
ion OF the United States Supreme Coul
would not be binding on Great Britain
another has been raised namel,
- u, that the Executive Department throug
- the Secretary Of State, is the proper char
- mel Tor deciding, by diplomacy, all such col
" nicts. and the Judiciary and Executive d
partments are each absolutely independel
OF each other.
q This does not seem any more tenab
nc than the other. In this case Il
source Of trouble originated in the court
Z" and is therefore legitimate point for Il
IL courts 10 settle. The domain of the CT
~ tary of State has not been invaded, ana ia
ue gentleman is free TO indulge in all q
20, diplomacy he may desire althous
u" of course. for him 20 take advantage
Nv his privilege in this instance Won
he useless. I'm fact it would probah
be decidedly advantageous to the Tint
nu States if all her international D
putes could be arranged in her cour
They would not OnlY lheIep9 w o"0O'""
"s settled. but the country would
III spared much Of the cheap Jngoh
ID md windy efforts at buster WIN
eu now too frequently characterize d
Ii lomatic discussion when carried ON
NE statesmen" who are more solicitous
what notoriety they can gain than for
oh agreement over the subject at issue
I'e tween them. 10 certainly would great
It's simplify international controversies, and
la' may be that this case will prove the inal
u'- uration of a new era IN the world Of q
'n' lomacy. The submission Of knotty qua
10 lions 10 the courts, wherever practical
nu' vauld result at least in securing a 70
III basis upon which TO conduct further nee
''' sary negotiations.