The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1892-03-29
LORD sALIsBURY's LAST PROPOSE
TION.


March % Lord Salisbury submits these
propositions:
First, the English government is will
ing to consent to the renewal of the
modus uiUendi of last year which forbade
pelagic sealing altogether, and restricted
the number of seals that might be killed on
the islands to the necessities of the natives,
provided in case the decision of the arbi
traitors is in favor of Great Britain, that
is against our right to prohibit pelagic
sealing, we will pay such damages as
they may assess for losses to the sealing
vessels by reason of such prohibition;
Great Britain agreeing on her part to
pay such losses as may accrue to us or to
our lessees by reason of the prohibition
of seal killing on tine islands in case the
decision of the arbitrators is in our
favor.
Second. as an alternative proposition,
the English government will agree that
we may prohibit pelagic sealing during
the tendency of the arbitration, provided
there are excepted from this prohibition,
such vessels as may give bonds to pay
any damages which the arbitrator may
assess against them in case the decision
is adverse to Great Britain.
The first of the propositions appears to
be fair and practicable. 1t preeludes all
danger during the tendency of arbitra-
ton proceedings of the determination of
the seal, and it also averts all danger of
a collision between our naval vessels and
those of England, danger which would
exist if without the assent of England we
should send a fleet to Behring Sea and
undertake to prevent by force Canadian
vessels from taking seals in the open sea.
1t obliges us to pay damages in case the
arbitrators decide that we have no right
to prohibit pelagic sealing outside of the
three-mile limit, to the vessels whose
business is suspended by this arrange
ment, but if we have been exercising in
the sea power that we do not possess
and breaking up a business that the arbi
traitors hold to have been lawful, it seems
to be only equitable and just that we
should pay the losses that have accrued
by reason of the exercise of that power,
especially as England admits the liability
on her part to pay us damages for the
suspension of sealing on the islands in
case the decision of the arbitrators is in
our favor. With or without an agree
ment it seems plain that we should be
holden for damages if the decis ion of the
arbitrators should be against us, SO that
the agreement really adds nothing to our
liability in that respect, while it protects
the seal meanwhile and averts all danger
of a collision between the parties to the
controversy, and therefore all danger of
war.
Lord Salisbury's alternative PROPOSE
ton is not SO acceptable. In fact it is
essentially the same proposition which
he made in his preceding note, and which
our government promptly rejected. 1t
would not check, or. would check to only
smallextent. pelagic sealing during the
tendency of arbitration, and it would put
our government in the very undignified
position of accepting bonds from lot of
men whom we held to be committing
unlawful depredations upon our prop
erty, and on the strength of those bonds
consenting that they should pursue their
work Of spoliation.