The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1891-01-06
BLAINE AND SALISBURY.
Their CORES pondenoe on the Behrinr
ssa Question.

Their correspondence on the behtlhl
ssa Question.
WASHINGTON. -. c., Jan. j.-Ihe Pres
.1o otto.dav sent 10 Congress the concludin.
. ,spoudence between Lord Salisbury and
,rv Blaine. touching the Behrng Sea
~ 80 question. The correspondence
;.'. u' a letter from Lord Salisbury.
,,1 ,,,,,s, ,. 1890. in reply to secretary
- ,'t, 60. IF last July, and Mr.. Blame
p'',no ',,'i,o de., j the 18th of December, last.
l .iisInr, contends that both the
I,ni'ed 1-, Statas and Great Britain refused TO
admr anv part Ot the RUSSIAN cialll'
in the Ukase VI Ill o e,l,i.i', ma, ,,''n'
plrisdicti ~ and eNclush 1isut VI ,.',ii' n9'i''
throughout Behriug sea; To. "iu Wy l,',n-
I.r,y.rn Great Britain, the / hlS St"'o''
AMI Rass,, I'm 1874 and 1928 mere was "
remuneration OF that claim on the pa ,ho
Russia. and also that Behring sea IN 'i'i',
ur q was regarded as part OF the Pa
Srrrrtary Blaine, in his answer, contends
In the treaties had reference solely to
waters aud coasts Of the continent south oi
the Alaskan peninsula and on the North
west American coast. lhe whole question:
he argues, hinges ON the settlement oil "a
s,nole point II Great Britain can maintain
her po,ition that the Behring sea al thr
lime of the treaties was included IN the
Pacific Ocean. then the Government OF me
United States has no well grounded
c.molain-t against her. Ii, on
tb. other hand. this Government
can prove beyond all Goubt that the Bchring
~.a AL the daie of the ueIties WAS usder-
stood by the three signatory powers liussia,
Great Britain and the United states to the
-ppcrate body o. water. and was not III
ch.ded an the phrase, Pacific ocean, then
he American case against Great Britain l.
d, c,mpltte and uudtni Die. The dispute, ne
saNs. prominently involves the mea 0lng ol
,be ubrasc. .NnrthWest coast" The secre-
. ar, quotes freely from the treaties 10 show
n nj there was no misundersi indln ahoul
tb,. territory referred 10 as the NOf invest
roa u. aud that II means the American cOasl
l.fv,esa lhe filticth aud slNtieth degrees Oi
In, Latitude. and also argues from the
,i.auce or any mention Of Behring sea or
'ne Son Of kamschatka, boy both OF wnicb
n..,es that body Of water Was weli known
IN the tiune that the negotiations GA nol
intend Ia include IL a. a portion OF the
pacific. Ocean" lie points TO the
fact as a weishty argument against
the ..Pacihc Ocean" claim made by Loru
salisbury that for more than lhirly 4edrs
of.r the treaty, or until after tue nlted
States had acquired Alaska. and all Rus
.i,n RIGHTS in Behring sea. the Kussian-
American Fur company under the prONc-
tion M the Russian Government, had car
r,ed on It's business In behring
Sea without interference from BRUSH
.hins. Great Britain and the United states
recognized. respected aud obeyed Tue
an,hor,Iy Of Russia there. and 1t still re-
mains Tor England 10 explain why She per-
sistently violates the same rights when
transferred to the United states.
Iord Salisbury's letter closes by saying
that n the United States Government, alter
termination OF the evidence and argu-
ments produced, still differ from them az TO
the LEGALITY OF the recent captures In tnat
sea the British Government Is ready 10
= cree that the question with the issues that
Asnend upon il should be referred 10 im'
partial arbitration. ,,.,.o. ;, am.
ge.tinx that ii will mean something tsngt
s,s n Great Britain will consent 10 srbl-
trate ibe real questions which have been
uaGer discussion between the two Govern
sasrts far The last four years, relating 10 the
iar.Sdi ton Of the United States IN -Behrlns
80 under the treaty with Rsssis
tsot what rights II any Ii
sa, sea were conceded Great Britain