Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-03-11

under discussion between the two gosernments
for the last four years. In regard to the ques-
tons as they are proposed by Mr.. Blaine,
should say that, as TO the first and second, NO
objection will be offered by her majesty's gov
ernrneut They are IA follows:
First. What exclusive jurisdiction in the
sea Known as the Boring sea and what exclusive
rights in these seal fisheries therein did Russia
assert and exercise prior and up to the time of
the cession of Alaska to the United States?"
Second. How far were these claims of juris-
diction as to the seal fisheries recognized and
conceded by Great Britain?''
The third question is expressed in the fol-
lowing terms:
Was the body Of water now known rs the
Boring sea included in the phrase Pacific
ocean as uaed int the treaty Of 1898 between
Great Britain and RUSSIA, and what rights IF
any in the Boring sea were given or conceded
TO Great Britain by the said treaty.
Her majesty's government would have no
objection to referring to arbitration the first
part OF that question if it should be thought
desirable to do so, but they would give that
consent with the reservation that they do not
admit that the decision of it can conclude the
larger questions the arbitrator would have to
determine. To the latter part of number
three 1t would be their duty to take exception:
What rights. if any, in the Behring sea were
given or conceded to Great Britain by the said
treaty2'
Great Britain has never suggested that any
the said treaty. All that was done was TO
recognize her natural right of free navigation
and fishing in that, as in all other parts of the
Pacific ocean. Russia did not give those rights
to Great Britain because they were never hers
to give away.
Fourth Did not all the rights of Russia to
jurisdiction and to the seal fisheries in Boring
sea east OF the water boundary in the treaty
between the United States of the 30th of March,
1867, pass unimpaired to the United States
under that treaty?
The fourth question is hardly worth referring
to an arbitrator, as Great Britain would be pre-
pared to accept it without dispute.
Inc nfth proposed question runs as follows:
Fifth What are now the rights of the United
States as to the fur seal fisheries in the waters
of the Boring sea outside of the ordinary terri
torial limits. whether such rights grew out Of
the cesslon by Russia of any special rights or
jurisdiction held by her in such fisheries or in
the waters OF Boring sea or out of the owner
snip OF the breeding islands and the habits of
the seals in resorting thither and rearing their
young thereon and going out from the islands
for food, or out of any other fact or incident
connected with the relation of those seal fish
cries to the territorial possessions Of the United
States?
The first clause, '.what are now the rights of
the United States as to the fur seal fisheries in
the waters of the Bering sea outside of the or
binary territorial lmits!" is a question which
would every properly referred to the decision
of an arbitrator. But the subsequent clause.
which assumes that such rights could have
grown out of the ownership of the breeding
islands, and the habits OF the seals resorting
thereto, involves an assumption 10 the pre-
scorpions OF international. law at the present
time, to which her majesty government is not
prepared to accede.
The sixth question {relating to the establish
ment OF a closed period in seal fishing), which
deals with the issues that will arise in case the
controversy should be decided in favor OF Great
Britain, would perhaps more fifty form the
substance of separate reference. Her mai
estys government has no objection to refer the
general question Of close time to arbitration
or to ascertain by that means how far the en-
actment OF such provision is necessary for
the preservation Of the seal species but any such
reference ought not to contain words appear
ing to contribute special and abnormal rights
III the matter TO the United States.
There is an omission in these questions which
have no doubt the government of the Presi-
dent will be very glad to repair; and that is the
reference to the arbitrator of the question
what damages are due to the persons who have
been injured, in case it shall be determined by
him that the action of the United States in
seizing British vessels has been without warrant
In international law. Subject TO these reserya-
tons, her majesty's government will have
great satisfaction in joining with the govern
ment OF the United States in seeking by means
of arbitration an adjustment Of the interna-
tiOnal questions which have so long formed
matter Of controversy between the two goyeia-
ments.