The Ohio Democrat. (Logan, O. [Ohio]) 1886-1906, 1892-04-02
SALISBURY
Replies to Mr.. Wharton's Note Of
March 22.
Ho Discusses the Matter OF Damages, md
Declares That He Has Objected Only
t0 the English Governments Lia-
bilitys for Acts Not Committed.

LONDON, March 2s.-Lord Salisbury,
under date of March 20, has replied as
follows TO Sir Julian Pauncefote, in
response to Mr.. Wharton's note of
March 22:
'In reply to your telegram of the 23d
inst, notice has been given to owners
of ships sailing for Behring sea that
both agreements at present under dis
cussion between Great Britain and the
United States-that as to arbitration and
that as to an intermediate arrangement
may affect the liberty of sealing in
Behring sea- They have, therefore, notice
Of their liability TO possible interrupt
ton, and will sail subject to that
notice. The question of time is not,
therefore, urgent. Inform the presi-
dent that we concur in thinking that
when the treaty has been ratified there
will arise a new state of things. Until
it is ratified our conduct is governed by
the language of your note of June IA,
1890. But when it is ratified both
parties must admit that contingent
rights have become vested in the other,
which both desire to protect.
1--WE think that the prohibition of
sealing, If it stands alone, will be un-
just to British sealers if the decision Of
the arbitrators should be adverse to the
United States. We are, however, willing
when the treaty has been ratified, to
agree to an arrangement similar to that
of last year if the United States will
consent that the arbitrators should,
in the event of decision adverse to
the United States assess the damages
which the prohibition of sealing shall
have inflicted on British sealers during
the tendency of the arbitration, and in
the event of decision adverse to Great
Britain should assess the damages
which the limitation of slaughter shall
| during the tendency of arbitration
hav4 inflicted on the United States or
| its lessees. AS an alternative course
we are also willing after the
ratification of the treaty to
prohibit sealing in the disputed
waters if vessels be excepted from pro-
| hibition which produce certificate
that they have given security for such
damages as the arbitrators may assess
in case of decision adverse to Great
|
necessary authority in that behalf. In
this case restriction of slaughter on
the islands will not in point of equity
be necessary. Her majestys govern
ment is unable to see any other than
one of these two methods of restricting
seal hunting in the disputed waters
during the arbitration, which would
be equitable to both parties.
A later note from Lord Salisbury to
Sir Julian Pauncefote dated March 2G
says: with further reference to your
telegram of the 23d inst. am not pre-.
pared to admit, as l gather, that the
president thinks that we have objected
to arbitrators having jurisdiction as tc
damages inflicted in the past by the
party against whom the award is given.
/ only object to her maiesty's govern.
ment being liable for acts they have not
committed. / am ready to consent to a
reference on this point on the following
terms That in case the arbitrators shall
decide in favor of the British govern
ment, that government may ask then
further to decide whether the United
States government have, since 1885
| IdhcH any dCJlOn III IDellIllS SCd ulItCClS y
inflicting wrongful loss to British sub
jects, and if so to assess the damages
incurred thereby.
That in case the arbitrators shall de
eide in favor of the government of the
United States, that government may
ask them to decide further whether
the British government have, since
| 1885 taken action in Behrin0 sea direct
ly inflictly wrongful loss ON the United
States, or their lessees, and, if so, to as
sess the damages incurred thereby"