The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1892-03-23

Lord Salisbury has answered the Presl-
dents dispatch asking renewed of the podus
cicendi for the coming sealing season. and,
though the dispatch is not given out. 1t is I'M
derstood that he refuses TO agree to the
proposition. What are we going to do about
it? The situation stands thus: An act OF
Congress is upon the statute book, which
asserts that the United States have the exclu-
sve ownership of Behring Sea and all the seals
that swim in its waters. 1t also requires the
President to capture and condemn ali vessels
found taking seals in those waters without a
license from the United States.
For number of years Canadian sealers
have been in the habit of taking seals in those
waters. and our naval vessels have seized
number of them. In the summer of 1880.
however, Lord Salisbury notified this
Government that if a further attempt were
made to seize Canadian vessels the attempt
would be resisted by all the power of the
British Government.
The sealing season of 1891 was bridged
over by an agreement for n,odus cicendi.
which excluded both American and Canadian
vessels from Behring Sea- but Lord Salisbury
refuses to agree to q nodas Uiccndi for the
season of 1892. If the President enforces the
act of Congress. he is notified that force will
be met with force which means in plain
English, war between this country and Great
Britain.
Are the people of the United States willing
to go to war with England over the seals in
Behring Sea If the seals were ours we should
say yes; 90 to war with England or the whole
world rather than be bullied out of single
SEAL But the seals are no more ours than the
Goldfish or halibut in those waters if there be
any. The seals are animals JerG nature.
found swimming in the high seas. and when
found there they are. by all the laws of the
civilized world. fair game for whomsoever
may encounter them. If then we fight, we
fight in quarrel the justice of which cannot
for moment be maintained.
Shall we fight in an unjust cause and bring
upon ourselves the fearful consequences "a
war with Great Britain? 1t must be war
upon the ocean, for which she is entirely pre-
pared, while we are wholly unprepared She
has q large number of iron-cads of the first
order, armed with the heaviest guns known
TO modern artillery. while we have
not one. A single iron-clad can
lie outside Coney Island aud burn
up and destroy the city of New York, and we
should be powerless to injure the vessel unless
by the precarious method of torpedoes.
But the inequality of the contest is a small
part of the matter. We send to Europe every
year for sale hundreds of millions of dollars
worth of grain. meat cotton and petroleum
England would at once blockade our ports as
the United States Government blockaded the
ports of the Confederacy, and all exports
would at once cease. Think OF the result in
this country Of sudden suspension of all
trade relations with Europe There is hardly
business in the land that would not be de-
stroyed Mercantile failures would cover the
whole face of the country.
Such a condition of affairs is too serious 10
be patiently thought of. If the irish vote of
New York must be conciliated by a twist of
the British lions tail, let us get some decent
pretext for quarrel. and let us, if we must
fight, at least get ready for the fray SO that
it can come off on some sort Of terms of
equality. Let us construct for ourselves
navy with which We can meet England on
the sea. At present she would brush our
pretence of a navy aside as if 1t were straw.