The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1894-04-23
NOW rNcLE sAM Musr rAE.
Compensntions that Canada VIII Demand
for Our Seizures of Tier Vessels.

| Compe Stations that Canada VIII Demand
for Our Seizures Of Her Vessels.
| WASHINGTON, April 2l.-Ths action both OF
| Congress and OF Parliament having made II
certain that the rules for seal hunting laid
down BIZ the Paris tribunal WILL be enforced this
season. the question OF damages comes up.
| When, AS the result Of diplomatic negotia-
TONS our country ARA IN aed for an almost fore
| gone conclusion By that tribunal on the claim
| OF ownership OF the open waters OF Behring
| Sea. Great Britain insisted upon having q
| foundation there laid for tip compen satiou OF
| Canadian vessels which might be adjudGed to
| have been unlawfully seized. Mr.. Blaine pro-
posed Ave articles involving questions for the
| on condition that q sixth should be added,
| covering this question OF damages.
And yet 1t should be observed that this arbi-
tratlon did not directly call for an award OF
damages. On the contrary, 1t was found im-
possible for the two Governments to agree to
terms on which they would submit for settle
mont what was called the question OF the
| liability Of each for the injuries alleged to
have been sustained by the other. or by It's cit
liens. in connection with the claims presented
and urged By It." What then was submitted?
The tribunal was empowered to make de-
clsions upon certain questions OF fact con-
ngs were to be accepted as binding upon the
two Goyernmen ts as to those facts. while the
question OF the liability OF either upon the
facts as found was to be made the subject OF
further negotiation. The result may perhaps
be stated in general terms as involving our
country 10 liability for damages. for the rea-
son that the decision OF the tribunal was that
seizures beyond the territorial waters had
been unlawful. while the findings Of fact which
accom- panied the main decision gave Q list OF
vessels " '''ch had been thus seized. Unless.
therefore, the United States Government could
show in some way that 1t was not liable on the
facts as found. which is scarcely contendsd. an
Impartial referee would assess damages.
But there 10 q second aud distinct basis Of
damages on which our country is liable. 1t
may be remembered that when the first modtis
rtreaH agreement was made with Great
Britain. It was alleged that the Canadians had
secured from the imperial Government either
an agreement or an understanding that the
latter would COMPENSATE its sealing schooners
for any losses. cs OF outfits or employment
provided they refrained from intruding upon
the prohibited area Of Behring Sea. The
ground Of this agreement or understanding
apparently was that since Great Britain be-
lieved that Its subjects had . right to hunt In
that sea. II for diplomatic reasons it called up
on them to refrain from such lawful pur-
suits. 1t ought to indemnify them for losses.
Whatever the truth rs to that matter. 1t is cer-
tain that when renewal Of the modus rirendi
was proposed, Lord Salisbury refused to agree
to II. unless this liability for compensation
should he assumed by tho United States in
under the arbitration then arranged for. Mr..
Blaine was ioreed 20 accept this condition.
ssr %Gsn e shs b. s ,a sa ssa S
agreement read as follows:
v Il me Ls;uis Of the arsitra9n at
ring within the bounds claimed By the United
a 5. Sy .s n.d 's % %
AN or the use o. her ,uSisesn for sb..anns from
Admiration upon ths 6Asi. OF such TssuIstsd and
racfs msht Say been TAKEN wisoas an Snaas DIM
na,,Sn q Tue seal nsrHs and on the other h,nd
hrtish ssaers 90 take seals within the said watera
q ma; Sn;I and fI:..a 20
Tie S. o hs dsT.n sss 10 eS
number and sneh larger catch tha opinion the
diSRatan o. herd TIE s@oant s~a1d.a an snS
III and AZ pro snI paia
Here. then. wo have another ground upon
which compensation can be claimed OF tho
Icy formally Snnouneed Din In the House. Of H ISfd:
the other day that as soon as the pending leg
islatlop for carrying out the Paris restrictions
would te entered Into between Great britain
and the United ststss for the settlement OF
from the decision that the seizures were illegal
tina. tho claims OF British subieots Tor COM
he'd that the United States would carry out
fully the provisions OF the award. On the
aas M he HSase mae 81 sms
that the United States Government had already
intimated that 1t would begin negotiations In
lation in PaEliament should be mpleted.
How much. then, will our country have to
Ra too count Tssina s .ho Tq ass
place. the seizures made prior TO the modus
vessels seized beginning with the Season Of
in March. 1880. that In ali, between those dates
sells each Of which was seized twice in different
years. or eighteen different vessels In all One
from land when seized. Three Others were Or
dered out Of Behring Sea. but the position
the warning was not to enter Behrinc Sea Sea.
One vessel. the Pathfinder. was seized In Neah
Bay which T. 10 the state Of Washington. on
two days. later was released there In all the
cases ,exespt those mentioned the distance
safely be stated that ali the cases present
grounds TOR COMPENSATION. The list IL among
Yet while the questions Of fact thus reported
STs u nSst p ssas%Se5sd that the
seIs and theIr Contents and also the OF nnssnn
OF who owned them were Withdrawn from tho
tribunal The tiPdi9gs Of the latter, indeed,
tain vessels were unlawfully seized. Now.
nothing Is clearer than that the claims put la
Die, and they will undoubtedly be cut down
Perhaps IN some cases i may be shown that u
OF the United states. although The vessels hal
from Victoria. Again, losses may have con-
sisted in the information OF a single seasons
employment or the seizure OF a single seasons
catch. In some cases there will 10 personal
damages for arrest and perhaps inprison-
be reduced.