Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-03-06
ALASKA SEAL BILL
Senator Morgan's Minority Report
Against the Measure.
NOEICUSEFOR WHOLEsALE SLAUGHTER
Effect Of Its Passage Upon Other
Nations interested.
THE TREATY BIN ING

Senator Morgan, who led the opposition
in the committee on foreign relations to the
Dingley bill for the determination of the
fur seals of Alaska in case of the refusal Of
England, Japan and Russia to agree to ar
bitration for their better protection, has
competed and probably on Monday will
present his report to the Senate giving the
reasons for his opposition. He will take
strong ground against the bill. both on the
score of humanity and of international
rights. He says the seals find in the ocean
their worst er emy-the pe!agic sealer. The
sealers v ork is described by the Senator as
"outlawed by the universal sense of human
ity," and he criticses the bill as an effort
to foil this enemy by placing the destruc-
ton in the hands of the agents Of the gov
eminent. His report continues:
ITO say nothing of the total change in
our policy expressed in our laws and incor-
porated and confirmed by treaty engage
mentS with Great Britain, under which the
protection and preservation of the fur seals
is now a duty secured by solemn agree
ments, 1t Is difficult to imagine any excuse
or justfice ton for the wholesale slaughter
Of these valuable and docle animals by the
order of the Congress of the United States"
Effect on Other Nations.
Referring to the fact that even in case
the ether countries concerned refuse to en-
ter into the proposed convention, the execu-
tive department, acting through it's agents.
can, he argues, use it's discretion in killing
the seals.
The opinion is expressed that the other
governments will accept the bill as BAN
ter and inSincere threat and will refuse to
negotiate with us. Even If their interests
or their pride are not involved in the condi
tons that are stated as the result of their
refusal to accept the terms proposed in
iS fu1 If hoy
not be provoked into merrment instead Of
compassion at our threat that we will de-
stroy our own property on our own soil if
they do not agree to our method Of pre-
serving it,
He thinks it improbable that Russia and
Japan would unite in the cruel policy Of de-
struction unless they should do so for the
mercenary purpose of enhancing the value
of their own herds, which he does not be-
lieve those governments capable of.
No good result Mr.. Morgan asserts, can
come from the adoption of the policy pro-
posed. He says 1t is a hazardous and I'M
wise act for Congress to anticipate the eX-
ecutive in any matter that can be settled
by treaty, and states that it is understood
that this government is engaged in
diplomatic correspondence on this subject
with a prospect of success. This undertake
ing would be most likely interrupted by the
passage of the pending bill.
MIR. Morgan's Contention.
Contending for the observance of the
award CT the Paris tribunal of arbitration,
of which he was a member. Senator Nor
gan says:
The rights reserved to the United States
rested upon the sovereignty of the United
tates, and are important as to the revenue
the seals would yield to the government,
the food supplies they would afford to The
native inhabitants, the usefulness of the
pelts of the seals to the commerce of the
world. and the increase of the herds by
proper regulation of their breeding grounds.
Added to these considerations is the senti-
ment of humanity. All these considera-
tons. he says, entered into the attitude of
the United States in all their contentious
for the right, even exclusive in its nature
to protect and preserve the seal herds
Mr.. Morgan says the United States are
bound by the Paris treaty as long as it
is in force. ard that the treaty cannot be
dlsregarded while in force without respon-
sibilty on our part to the government Of
Great Britain. If the treaty is not salts
factory to the United States the remedy
Is by abroSaticn, and not its violation.
fBetween two such powers there is no
judge wLo can hold either to it's duty; they
are necessarily left to the arbitrament Of
the sword as the ultima ratio regum.
The Award and the Treaty.
IF that award DID not bind the two gov
elnments to execute the regulations so as
to protect and preserve the seals, 1t had"
Senator Morgan concludes, mo possible
effect. If it left either free to inflict whole
J sale and intended determination upon the
seals, the treaty ard the award were both
illusory. If the responsibility for the rapid
destruction of the seals rests with Great
Britain, as the bill assumes" the Senator
says, "a complaint should he addressed to
| that government, end If the fault is in the
award Of the Paris tribunal We ought first
to denounce it and free ourselves from
| the obligations it enjoins. Instead of that,
the President has sent to the Senate
convention, recently negotiated with Great
Britain, which affirms the award and the
treaty under which it was rendered, and
pa ssaGe Of this bill would virtually dis
rense with that convention, as it would
necessarily be based on the conclusion of
Congress that the United States govern
ment is no longer bound to respect the OBJ
legations Of the treaty of February %, 1882,
or the award of the tribunal of arbitration
by which that treaty was completed in its
final and most important provisions"