The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1893-03-26
BEHRING SEA CASE.
The ArbitratOrs Decided to Hold the
Court with Open Doors.
Details of the Case Presented by the
United States and What
1t Claims.

NEW YORK, March 25.-The Herald
Paris cable says: At the meeting on
Thursday the Behring sea arbitrators de-
cided that the sitting should not be held
behind closed doors. This permits max
ing public the exact point of contention.
Briefly stated the case of the United States
is: The Alaskan fur seal IS begotten, born
and reared upon Pribylov islands to winch
they return each spring to spend several
months conserving together. That while
at these islands the seals are easily con-
troIled; that discrimination can be and
/ has been exercised. While absent from
the islands during migration which
reaches as lar south as the coast of Call
fornia, they land on no other shore ana
mingle with no other herd of fur sssals'
herd and each individual OF 1t IS the
property of the United States.
The methods employed by open sea seal
ers is attacked by the American govern
-nent as destructive, wasteful and exter-
mirating 1t is claimed large percentage
of seals killed by open sea hunters are fe-
males, the majority of which are about to
become or are mothers. The destructlon
of the pregnant female causes the death OF
the unborn young, and the death
of the mother seal, killed while IN search
of food in the waters of Behring sea.
destroys the offspring on Prlbylov TOOK
cries. It is further claimed that many
seals shot in the open sea by hunters es-
cape MORALLY wounded or sink before the
hunter reaches them. Open sea sealing,
| it is argued, will result in the destruction
of the herd in the near future. On the
islands only limited number of male
seals are killed. As the seal is polyga-
nous q large number of males can be
| killed without affecting the birth rate OF
the herd.
| On these facts the American govern
ment claims from the nature of the IN
dustry established on Pribylov islands
that the United States has the right to
protect and preserve there seals wherever
they may be. found, as animals can only
| be killed on United States territory with
out danger of determination. 1t is also
claimed that owing to the long period of
CESSATION petalgic sealing cannot at any
| time be otherwise than destructive. dan
gerous and wastefnl and should be pro-
| hibited.
The case of Great Britain, on the other
hand, is that Alaskan seals have no
characteristics OF animals that can be made
subject to property; that it is not certain
that they land only upon Pribylov islands,
or that they do not intermingle with the
Russian seal herd or that they are petalgic
in nature and therefore should be treated as
fish rather than land animals; that many
of the propositions essential to the posi-
ton taken by the United States are un-
proven or contrary to facts. As to petal
gle sealing, it is claimed that destruc-
tiveness and wastefulness have been
greatly exaggerated; that it is legitimate
and proper methods Of taking seals and
can be prosecuted without danger of ex-
terminating the herd.
Much importance is also given by the
s-1 ,oI
claims over Behring sea, but this appears
to be treated by the United States as a
secondary question Both nations con-
cede that seals have decreased, the United
States charging such decrease to the de-
struction of producing seals by open sea
sailing. Great Britain claiming the
present condition has been caused by the
excessive number of mares killed on the
islands and injurious effects of the meth
DDS there employed.