Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-11-11

TIE sAYwARD cAsE-rHE POLITICAL QUESTION
DENIED By COUNSEL AND AFFIRMED BY THE
SOLICITOR AND ATTORNEY GENERAL
The argument in every phase Of the Ber-
ing sea question before the Supreme Court
has now been disposed Of and the decision of
the court will be awaited with interest The
case Of tho American sealer Sylvia Handy,
which comes up on an appeal from the district
court Of Alaska and involves the same question
Is to the jurisdiction Of the United States over
the waters Of Bering sea beyond the three
mile limits as that involved in the Say
ward case, came up today and the
arguments on both sides were completed. As
stated in The STAR at the time the brief of the
attorneys for the appellant was filed day or
two ago. The government filed in this case
the brief In the Sayward case amended as to
the name Of the vessel
THE SAME LINE OF ARGUMENT.
The argument was opened by the counsel for
the appellant, Mr.. William G. johnson. With
the exception Of facts that this case came up
on an appeal and related to the rights of an
American citizen instead Of a British subject
this case covered the same line of argument as
the Sayward case and but an hour was con-
sumed in presenting it Mr.. johnson, after in
cidentally referring to the fact that the
Attorney General and the solicitor general
in their brief in both cases and in
argued in favor Of the right Of appeal from the
district court Of Alaska and that the Attorney
General had taken a different position in later
remarks to the court in connection with the
case said he would accept the conclusion
reached in the governments brief that the
right Of appeal existed. He said that there
was no dispute as to the place Of seizure-sev-
enteen miles from shore-and that the govern
ment had not, as in the Sayward case, attempted
to show that this vessel had at any time been
sealing on the top Of a mountain in the Ameri-
can territory; 1t was simply question of the
right Of an American citizen to exemption from
the seizure of his property on the high seas for
an act prohibited within the jurisdiction of the
United States.
ANY POLITICAL QUESTION DENIED.
He denied that there was any political ques-
ton involved and denied also that the rights of
the American citizen were affected by any
declaration on the part of the executive as to the
extent OF the jurisdiction Of the United States
II such declaration were made by the Presi-
dent 1t was long after this seizure. and if it had
any force at all, to affect this case would have
to be retroactive. He said he had hoped that
the government would argue the merits of the
case in their brief and not confue themselves
to the argument of technical objections to the
consideration Of the case by the court on its
merits.
They had contended that the President had
declared that the jurisdiction Of the United
States extended over Bering sea, but that they
had made no attempt to show that he was right
In this direction. and in matters affecting the
property Of American citizens it was more i'm
portant to be right than to be President.
SOLICITOR GENERAL rAyrs REPLY.
so,;,;tor r....., M. ,,o,.a o., ,ho
~ ~ ' oPeeu .o WIG eo'
ernment briefly. He said that the position
taken by the government in the Sayward case
covered this, and the same arguments and au-
thorities would apply. He noticed that in this