The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1897-04-11
THE SUN. SUNDAY. APRIL II. 1897.

81, Sir JULIAN PAuNcErorE handed to Mr..
Uni certain instructions dated May ~, as
received by him.
In this tardy response IL was suggested
that the case for protection was not 80
urgent as our country thought 1t that,
while sealing on the Asiatic side of tho
Pacific had increased, arguments drawn
from that fact were deceptive, as the in.
crease of slaughter there did not seriously
menace the Pribvlov herd. Then IT was
suggested that, since fewer vessels han in
1892 captured q greater aggregate of seals,
perhaps " more seals were met with than
before, and from this point Of view the in.
creased catch does not point to any immi-
nent danger Of extinction Of the species"
Accordingly Great Britain refused to
make the modms viuendi, coolly telling us
that ii is to be remembered that the ~sealers
have almost all now started" although our
request had been made our months before.
She could not we'll refuse to gather infor1na.
tion on the subject, but proposed that this
should be done by agents instead of by an
international commission, as this last
"would not at present lead to any useful
result" And, In fact, our Government, as
the best that could be hoped for, was com.
PEELED to arrange for distinct commissions,
ours working separately from those of
Great Britain and Canada, and all of them
being postponed until last year.
One other reason, of special interest Just
now, was gravely urged for denying our
earnest request. This was that The Paris
tribunal had fixed five years as the period
after which the regulations might be re-
vised. Only one year has elapsed" said the
English reply, and, beyond the mere fact
that the ~sealers, by scrupulously adhering
to the regulations, had chad u successful
season" there was no good reason for ask
ing that the five years fixed for revision
should be so curtailed. "To set aside their
authority upon SO slight a ground would, in
the opinion of her Majesty's Government,
be a most serious blow to the authority of
arbitral decisions, and to the general prin-
ciples Of arbitration which both govern
ments have at heart to promote"
1t may be imagined with what disgust
this reply was received by Mr.. UHL. In.
deed, already, as acting Secretary of State,
on May 10 he had called Sir ULIAN PAUNCE-
FoTE's attention to the subject again,
with additional facts and figures. These
figures, he insisted, "must satisfy the
most skeptical mind that the fur seal herd
will be speedily exterminated," unless the
Paris rules should be altered. That letter
did not reach London until after that of the
British Government had been sent, and it
appears from the record that 1t was never
answered at all.
And now, turning again to Mr.. CURzoN's
statement, we find the British Government
once more referring to the full Measure of
five years allowed it by the Paris tribunal
before doing anything to modify the rules.
Yet the recognized purpose of those rules to
protect the seals, and the demonstration by
experience that they do not protect, should
outweigh the notion that an agreement Of
the two Governments alone concerned to
modify those rules within three or four
years instead of after the prescribed five,
would, in British opinion, I" be a most seri-
ous blow to arbitral decisions"
However, Mr.. CURzoN, in his remarks,
said that the reports of last years Brit
ish Commissioners to Behring Sea had
been received, and were being examined"
Let us hope that these reports, commonly
surmised to recommend a change in the
rules, may lead Great Britain to agree to a
modus rirendi, one feature of which will
be no sealing in Behring Sea this year.