The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-11-27
CANADA AND THE SEAL QUESTION.

A press dispatch from Ottawa, which
seems to speak by authority, says that the
Dominion government has decided to de-
cline the proposition of the United States
to stop pelagic sealing for year, and will
forward it's decision to Washington at once.
If this is true it will probably put an end
to further negotiations for closer trade
lations between the two countries, and per-
haps to any further conference relative to
the settlement of other open questions. The
decision is Enthusiastically Canadian, and
savors very strongly of what in common
phrase is called ''hoggishness." 1t is the
same spirit that has characterized Canada's
dealings with the United States not only
from the beginning of the sealing troubles,
but in other matters for long time past.
Always she wants something for nothing.
She is ready enough to enter into negotia-
lions and make treaties or agreements, but
she always wants the big end of the bar
gain. She is willing to play give and take
provided the United States will do the CIV
ing and let her do the taking. Canada is
at the bottom of all the sealing trouble. The
British government has shown a reasonable
easily have settled the controversy with
that government if Canada would have per-
mitted. Canadian stubbornness and greed
have stood in the way 1t was Canadian
vessels that violated the laws of the United
States and the modus vivendi that had been
agreed upon; it was Canadian ship owners
who put in claims for damages which are
still pending, and now, after having almost
destroyed the seal herds, they refuse to
agree to stop pelagic sealing for one year,
although the United States, Russia and
Japan, the owners of the seal islands, have
joined in an agreement to that effect. Not
only this, but the United States agreed to
stop the killing of seals on land, on it's own
islands, for the same period if Canada
would agree to stop deep-sea sealing. This
is much as if a man should say to a poach-
ing or depredating neighbor, Il am SO anx-
ious to restore the game on my place that
1 will agree not to kill any for year if
you will premise to abstain from poaching
for the same length of time" Canada re-
fuses to enter into such an agreement,
thereby showing that she prizes the privi-
lege of continuing the indiscriminate
slaughter of seals by a species of piracy as
of more value than any reciproci ty agree
ment She could make with he United
States. In effect she says to he United
States: You may do as you plt ase about
not killing your seals, but am going to
continue the slaughter"
If Canada takes this position the question
will arise whether the United States should
not put an end to the everlasting seal con-
troversy by eXterminating the seals. Prob
ably it would have saved money if it had
done so years ago, and certainly it would
have saved much friction and humiliation
through the failure of efforts to come to
some binding understanding for the preser-
walton of the seals. For years past the
Canadians have been devastating our prop
erty, insulting our dignity and trampling
upon our rights in the sealing business and
compelling the home government to sustain
them. Now, if they refuse to accept the
highly reasonable proposition to suspend all
seal killing for one year, why should not
the United States put an end to all fur
Their controversy by killing off the seals?
=