The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-03-11
SALISBURY'S OFFER.
A Hope Of Settling the Behrins
Sea Dispute.
The British Minister Is Willing to Submit
the Matter to Arbitration.
An Answer to Secretary Blaine'S Last Com
muniGatiOn 10 the British Foreign
Office on the Subject.
Special to THE MORNING CALL.

TURN, and the Governments OF the United
States and Great Britain appear to have at
last reached a basis upon which to settle
their difficulties. A communication from
Lord Salisbury to Sir Julian Pauneefote.
the British Minister here, under date of
February 18th, was made public by Secre-
tary Blaine tonight. In it Lord Salisbury
says the dispatch of Mr.. Blaine under date
of the 18th of December last had been care
fully considered 1T is now clear" he
adds, that the advisers Of the President
do not claim Behring Sea as mare clausum
and, indeed, that they repudiate that con-
tention in express terms. Nor do they rely
as a Justification for the seizure Of British
snlps In an open sea upon the contention
that the interests of the seal fisheries give
TO the United States Government any right
for that purpose, which, according to in
ternationai law, it would not otherwise
possess. Whatever importance they attach
to the preservation of the fur-seal species,
and they justly look on it as an object de-
serving the most serious solicitude, they do
not conceive that it confers upon any mari
time power a right over an open ocean
which that power could not assert on other
grounds.
NO CLAIM TO BEHRING SEA.
"The claim of the United States to prevent
the exercise of seal-fshing by other nations
in Bshring Sea rests now exclusively upon
the interest which by purchase they possess
in the ukase issued by Emperor Alexander
/, In the year 1921, which prohibits foreign
vessels from approaching within 100 Italian
miles of the coast and islands then belong
ing TO Russia in Behring Sea- 1t is not, as
/ understand, contendeds that the Russian
Government. at the time Of the issue of this
ukase, possessed any inherent right to en-
force such prohibition. or acquired by the
act Of issuing it any claims over the open
sea beyond the territorial limit of three
miles which they would not otherwise have
possessed But 1t is said this proposition,
worthless in itself. acquired validity and
force against the British Government be-
cause that Government can be shown to have
accepted its provisions.
NEVER ADMITTED IT.
sour contention is that not only it cannot
be shown that the Government of Great
Britain, at any time since 1921, has admitted
the soundness of the pretensou put forward
by that ukase but that il can be shown it
has categerically denied it on more than
CT me occasion"
no sustain this contention Lord Salisbury
quotes from letter dated January, 1922,
from Lord Londonderry to Count Lieven,
the Russian Embassador in Lon don, and
also from note by the Duke of Wellington
to Count Nesselro lie in October. 1922, refus-
ing to ad init Russia's claim Continuing,
Lord Salisbury says:
SU BSEQUENT TREATIES.
"Mr. Blaine does not deal with these pro-
tests, but confines himself mainly 10 tue
consideration OF the treaties subsequently
made between Great Britain and Russia
and America and Russia in 1926, aud espe-
cially of that between Russia and Great
Britain. This treaty does not contain
word to signify the acquiescence OF Great
Britain in the claim recently put forward by
Russia to control the waters of Behring Sea
for 100 miles from her coast. | understand
Mr.. Blaine's argument to be that if Great
Britain intended to protest against the claims
of Russia to exclude ships for 100 miles
from her coast in Behring Sea she
would have taken this opportunity of doing
so, but that in confining herself to the stipu-
latiOns in favor of the full liberty of nayiga-
tlon and fishing in any part of the ocean
commonly called Pacific Ocean, sle by inn
plicatlon, renounced any claim that could
arise out OF tile same set OF circumstances
in regard to any sea that was not part of the
L OCOdus Auu bHtu MI sOCo
on to contend that the phrase Pacific Ocean
did not and does not include Behring Sea.
WILL NOT ADMIT BLAINEs CLAIM.
Even if this latter contention were cor
rect, l should earnestly demur to the con-
clusion that our inherent right to free pass
age and free fishing over the vast extent of
ocean could be effectively renounced by
mere reticence or omission. But | am not
prepared 10 admit the justice of Mr.. Blaine's
contention that the words Pacific Ocean
did not include Bebring Sea. Mr.. Blaine
adduces long list of maps in which desig
nation distinct from that of Pacific Ocean
is given to Behrlng Sea; either 'Behring
Sea- or Sea of Kamschatka, or Sea of
Auadir.' This argument will hardly have
any force unless it is applicable with equal
truth to all other oceans of the world"
PREFERENCES GIVEN.
Lord Salisbury says the determination of
this point can be most satisfactorily ascer-
tanned by consulting books of reference, of
which he RppendS Il list of some thirty of
various dates, from 1895 downward, and
printed in various countries, which COM
bined to show that in common parlance the
words Pacific Ocean" do include Behring
Sea. IF, then, in ordinary language, the
Pacific Ocean is used as phrase, including
the whole sea from Behring Straits to the
Antarctic circle, it follows that the first ar
ticle of the treaty of 1924 did secure to Great
Britain in the fullest manner freedom of
Navigation tuu uSulIB III DcuIIilp Ocd III
that case no inference, however indirect or
circuitous, can be drawn from any omission
in tile language Of that instrument to show
that Great Britain acQuisced in the usurpa-
tion which the ukase of 1921 attempted.
Other documents l have quoted suffi-
ciently to establish that sho not only did not
aequiesce in it, but repudiated it more than
once In plain and unequivocal terms, and
what right Russia did not herself possess
she was not able 10 transmit to the United
States. Her Majesty's Government has. in
view of these considerations, no doubt what
ever that British subjects may enjoy the
same rights in Behring Sea which belong
TO them in every other portion of the open
ocean; but 1t is nevertheless matter of
sincere satisfaction that the President is
willing to refer to arbitration matters which
have been under discussion by the TWO
Governments for the last four years.
BLAINE's PROPOSALS.
SIN regard to the questions as proposed
by Mr.. Blaine, l should say as to the first
and second, that no objection will be ell
forced by her Majesty Government. They
are as follows:
81. What exclusive jurisdiction in the sea
known as Behrug Sea. and what exclusive
rights in the seal fisheries therein did Russia
assert and exercise prior and up to the time
of the accession of Alaska 10 the United
States ?
"2. How far were these claims of jurisdic-
conceded by Great Britain?
THE third question isexpressed In the fol-
lowing terms: WAS the body of water
now known as Behring Sea included in the
phrase Pacific Ocean as used in the
treaty of 1928 between Great Britain and
Russia, and what rights, il any, in Behring
Sea were given or conceded to Great Britain
by said treaty
WILLING TO ARB1TRATE.
"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 question which the arbi-
traitor would have to determine. To the
latter part of No. 8 it would be their duty to
take exception. Great Britain has never
suggested that any rights were given to her