New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1894-01-02
PROPERTY RIGHT IN SEALS,
SENATOR MORGAN'S ARGUMENT FOR THE
CLAIM OF TIE UNITED STATES.
BRINGING OUT THE PREsCRIPTIYE NATURE OF
THE RIGHTS OF RUSSIA AND THIS COUNTRY
IN REGARD TO FUR SEALS IN
BEHRING SEA-GREAT DRITAINS
long ACQUIEsCENCE.

IN REGARD TO FUR SEALS IN
BEnRrNG sEA-GREAT DR1TA1Ns
LONG ACoUIEsCENCE.
Washington jan 1.-The opinions Of Senator Nor
rnn upon the questions arising in the Behrihg sea
arbitration which were filed on Saturday with inc
secretary Of the tribunal at Paris Were not 81
volumnous those Of his associate aroi''"'o',
Mr. Justice Harlan, although there were more OF
them. Justice Harlan filed five, Senator Morgan
-,
Speaking Of his opinions. Senator Morgan saiu
they had been delivered from time to time IN inc
conferences of the arbitrator. ana were lh'o""eN
TO meet the arguments put forth by other members
Of the tribunal In putting them into permanent
shane he continued he had included only so much
Of tho original matter as would show in the future
the attitude of the United States upon the SUBJECTS
under discussion. Like Justice Harlan senator
Morgan delivered long argument. or OPINION upon
the claim of the United States TO property r1ght IN
the seal But, unlike his associate. he pased MS
argument that the prescptive rights Of the United
States, and previously those of Russia IN respect
Of the fur seals which habituay resort to Behring
Sea- are to be safely based upon the continued ana
unauestioned usage of both countries. as well as
upon the peculiar characteristics OF THESE ahlH"i'
Upon this point he said:
."rhe Russian Government exercised the right TO
own and control the seals that resorted To hehr"s
Sea, and made temporary grants to It's suDJeclS Oh
the right TO take them in those waters 1T may DC
part Of Russia not supported by any rule OF IN
ternatonal law. 1t was not distinctly an as
sumption OF right than was the title to the isiahus
based on the discovery Of them by a RUSSIAN SUD-
ject In both cases native sovereignty WAS us
placed to make room for the claims of Russia
backed by superior force. The processes OF APP
preparation the same in reference to the seals
and seal fisheries they were in reference to the
islands, viz, discovery, claim, occupation anu ue
veopment. Exclusive use and the acquiescence OF
other civilized powers were the attendant iac's
that established the right of property in both cases
"As all international law grows out OF custom
and has no other root. 1t cannot be denied that
the right of Russia to appropriate and protect 'tiS
herd of fur seals has been established by custom
and maintained by constant and exclusive use Ger
tainly no other nation in its sovereign character
has claimed these seals denied the right OF Rus
eia to their exclusive ownership. when Great
Britain in 1875. was treating with Russia Tor an
open sea, free navigation and the rights OF s'i"s
in these waters, she set up no claim 10 Il comma"
right Of hunting seals or fuy-bearlnS ahlHaI5 III
those regions. Russia went on renewing her c"a'-
ters for these purposes to her subjects and Great
Britain stood by and made no assertion of such
right for herself or her subjects for about nan
century. Nearly century elapsed aiter Inc oo'o-
nizaton Of the islands by Russia before any Brlish
subject opposed the claim of Russia ana the 'hl'eu
States, her vendee to property right IN inc seai9
that habitually resored to BehrinS sea. There are
few customary rights that have a surer foundation
In usage or upon the doctrine of acquiescence uah
the world has accorded TO Russia in respect u
the right the fur seals resortinS TO BehrihS SEA
1.-THE long acquescence Of Great Britain IN TINS
claim of ownership In seals by Russia was nov only
without objection. protest or diplomatic snss e+
ton TO the contrary, but that Government mas EN-
couragcd her own people 10 base an nv.
valuable industry upon the material prorneu n Dg
Russia and regularly supplied to them IRON ~. i,,
10 s tbS Russia nS aHd the United
mistook the law OF nations wh.h t,e! .nars ~ ~
sen.iescence attended with no harm - British PEG
rle or interests, but with great hehcnlS |" p..'' 20
Gtast Rritain that live seals resortng to Behrng
Sea are property as much as dead ones are ths,
Of Great Britain is not needed to establish the
proposition that there is property in i've Se"iS anu
'n The senator discussed the las, point and grogPe!
the assertions rs h ,e tue s1 IN qason h
are alive and without the incident Of actual capture
First as right BY Prescrpon d frn fT pna
Russia and acquiesced in by Gfc and me Pope
'n .second as a right established by law within
its domain 6 impaired by the he HeSfc ~
Sood either while they are inhabting the seal s
s s.s ex or wnsn in %s tf the Fad
Third as "a I'll, Tsh sa 81 OF tks anas and mir
islsSd: =. rrn, ., oropery growing on, Of
the necessity Of governmental control Of the fur,
seals TO pfsc cs control can be efficiently exercised
only by the Government whose territory Is occupied
property. ratione impoten'ia. 49,, -, ,.o Coo.
Fifth as a right Of property, based on the iac'
iished by the fact that objection or protest was
made or adverse action was tah Is any was esab
lished. depending for its supp2r' b, Ch y he d.
stroyed II indscrminate pelasic hunting Is Iu''"''
ppeeurrng to the right Of prescription the Senator
I'm the English common law an absolute the is IS
n
omen possessIon OF the occupant and those holding
Under him for the period Of twenty years This IL
rule of repose adopted for the pace Of socety IN
those features 1t is even more useiul Det"'.! i a.
hi. rule that the courts of both countries have uni
for,nly declared that any grant Will aetd oi SoaC 49,
viii be conclusvey presumed to ex;si INA, h - e bid
uninterrupted possession for twenty {e"r ,5s whole
mo Just reason can be statel %ry 'n.s h "n ny
some rule founded in the public pocy o, PI rr c IN
controversy between them and should not lnc 1
every interest in any properiS o az prscrl;on in
the exclusive control and enjoyment Of the claimant
The opposing rights whatcynr gS Of sgperr
t!s ~, Seals , are made property by the laws Of the
Tinted States ard are found on the ocean travelling
~ search of food the owner has ie right 70 ."
@ because It is useless for the purpose
OF protecting them ana If tney are m en.ilC' "a a.
the seals that habituay resort 20 the irinyon is -
ands by their being found in The easi,in p I1e On
the ocean the law regards the aniina.s az DF,t 80
1 rle Of constructive posseso security Of all
commerce ana all personal chatt'iN mos 49,
depends II IL an ali-pervading element Oh prop
fhe United States must protect the sea- asali, rs,
her own people or else they viii be specify he-
s,royeJ II I'm doing this all her care and expense
are turned to naught by a rule Of international
iaw she can only abandon the seals 20 their lat'.
10, he ,sianGs become barren OF all value. and
console herself with the reflection mat her sa'f,
ace adds a power TO ;he international law mat IS
more authorita i've than the judgment OF All tNe
Nations OF the earth. except Canada.
Tit is not surprising. in view OF such serious re-
suits as would follow the practice OF pelagic seal
ing and have already resulted from i, where j,
is nlaced on the same footing with the right of
fishing in the open sea, that the power 70 oriain
concurrent regulations for It's contro, or pYohibi-
fion was given TO a Tribunal Of Arbitration II iS
only by regulations. sud not by advice. or by the
statement OF the PRINCIPLES oi law NAY govern the
CHILL WILL NOT ALLOW AN EXTENSION.