The record-union., 1891-03-29
EX-MINISTER PHELPS ON THE
BEHRING SEA QUESTION:

Ex-Minister Phelps, our representative
at the English court under Mr.. Geve-
lands administration, comes to the sup
port of President Harrison's administra-
ton in the Behring Sea matter, in paper
that appears in Harpe1's Magazine. Mr..
Phelps at some length sets forth the
habits and natural history of the seal.
He shows that its taking is an exceed
ingly important commercial matter to
the United States. That the habits of
these sagacious animals is to cross from
their fixed habitation on our shores to
the Pribyloff Islands in the breeding
season, the islands forming a part of
Alaska. That this passage is necessity
to propagation. That, therefore, the ami
mails belong to us as they are not SWAN
derers of the sea-" but belong to the ter
ritory on which they make their home
and where they breed.
Establishing these premises, Mr..
Phelps declares it to be common prin-
ciple of law that it is our right and duty
= to protect such interests. Now the Cana
dians each year outfit ships and boats, and
intercept these seals in their temporary
passage between the islands and the Alas
kan shore. In open water they take them
at time and in a condition when they
should not be captured. Even those that
escape these poachers are rendered less
valuable because of the slaughter of those
that do not escape, and the latter are less
valuable because of the time and method
of taking. The inevitable result of this
practice will, ofcourse, be the extermina-
ton of the seal, in Alaska, and conse-
quently of all industries dependent upon
their propagation. From 1870 to 1888 the
seal fisheries, carefully guarded against
depredators, yielded 100000 skins each
year, but under Canadian poaching the
catch has fallen off, until last year the
licensed fishers We're able to take but
$1,000 skins.
Now, then, says Mr.. Phelps, the simple
question is, "Shall the Government OF
tht United States protect its property
from wanton destruction?" That is put
ting it very bluntly, but 1t is not the less
truthfully stated. 1t is precisely the
view of the matter that the people have
taken from the time the troubles began in
1887. The poaching by the Canadian
sealers is a criminal act under our laws;
whether the commission of the crime in
the waters of the sea affords the offenders
immunity, is the single question to be
decided at this time. Mr.. Phelps thinks
that, to the ordinary mind, this question
presents no great difficulty. Under Pres
ident Cleveland the United States pro-
posed a convention of England, Russia
and this country to fix closed season
in which seals should not be taken, and,
as that season would cover the breeding
period, it would, to great extent, pro-
tect our fisheries. The British Govern
sment did not meet that proposition with
any assertion of right to destroy the seals,
as now complained of, or by any vindica-
ton of that business. The agreement for
convention was acceded to, and every
one supposed that the matter had been
adjusted, when it developed that Canada
had interviewed with protest. This
brought the negotiations to a close.
though Mr.. Phelps believes that England
honestly tried to overcome the Canadian
opposition.
The ex-Minister then proceeds to dis
cuss the question of the right of the
United States to protect the seal fisheries
and enforce the Act of Congress against
poachers. He holds that of right, and by
virtue of the law of humanity, we are
justified in protecting the seals. This
brings him to the question of the ''open
sea-" and the claim of the poachers to
take seal in the open sea at any time it
may please them to do SO. Mr.. Phelps
strongly inclines to the belief that the
sale ofthe right to Alaska and its waters
to us by Russia conveyed a recognition
of the sea as closed waters. But he adds:
Suppose Mr.. Blaine is wrong and Lord
Salisbury is right in that matter, and
that the waters between the Pribyloff
Islands and the mainland outside of the
three-mile limit are to be regarded as
an open sea, in what does the freedom OF
the sea consist? In the legitimate pursuit
Of lawful business, or the wanton de-