The record-union., 1897-07-15
Secretary Sherman's Instructions to
ambassador Hay.
For Guidance in Urging Compliance With
the Paris Award.
Show at Length Great Britain's
Failure and Refusal to Support
This Government in Its Efforts
to Prevent the determination
of the Seal Herd.

of the Seal Herd.
NEW YORK, July IA special to
she Tribune" from Washington says:
Important instructions have recently
been sent by Secretary Sherman to
ambassador Hay for his guidance i'll
urging on the British Government Il
compliance with the provisions of the
Behring Sea award, which looked 10
the preservation of seal life in Alaskan
waters. The instructions were pre-
pared as a reply to a recent note from
Lord Salisbury, handed to Secretary
Sherman by Sir Julian Pauncefote a
few days before the British Embassa-
dor sailed for London from New York.
They show at length England's policy
of procrastination, her continued fail
ure and refusal to support this Gov
ernment in its efforts to prevent the
determination of the seal herd and
the anxiety of the United States fire.
quently made known to the London
Foreign Office, that steps should be
taken to preserve the seals as an obli-
cation imposed by the Paris tribunal
The instructions in part are as follows
His Excellency John Hay, London:
The British ambassador has handed
me copy of a dispatch to him from
her majesty's principal Secretary of
State for Foreign Affairs, which consti-
tutes the reply of the British Govern
ment to the proposals of the President
as presented in a note Of your embassy
for a mOdus vivendi, for a suspension
of all killing of seals for the present
season, and for joint conference of
the Powers concerned, with view to
the necessary measures being adopted
for the preservation of seals in the
North Pacific. 1t will be seen that
both proposals are rejected.
Il need hardly to say that the Pres
5dent is disappointed at this action, and
especially when it is based upon such
unsubstantial and inadequate reasons.
The Presidents concern, in view Of
the depleted condition of the seal herd,
was Occasioned not alone from an ex-
animation of DIR. Jordan's report OF
1896, and what he had reason to sup
pose We're the conclusions of Professor
Thompson, but it was based upon a
series of observations and statistics
covering a much longer period than
that treated by these gentlemen, es
1ablishing a state Of facts beyond re-
futation, and which is in part set
forth in my note to the British Embas-
sador of the same date as my cable
gram to you.
1T is therefore quite surprising that
her majesty's Secretary should base
his rejection of the proposals of this
Government, so impressively present
sad +Ian Of fe+
whose facts and conclusions are in
correctly appended, and the de-
tailed report of another. which is for
the first time made public concurrently
with the receipt of his lordship's note
1T would have been gratifying to me-
and useful to my Government in stud
ying this important subject under con-
sideration, if Professor Thompson's re-
port could have been made public with
the prOmptness which marked that of
DIR. Jordan. In that case there would
have been ample time for both Gov
Rrnments to have examined the reports
of these two eminent scientists before
4he opening of another sealing season.
But it seems to have better suited
the purposes of her majesty's Govern
ment to withhold Professor Thomp-
sons report until an opportunity was
afforded to inspect the report of Pro-
fessor Jordan, and thus enable the
former to pass the latter in review
crticise its statements and as far as
possible minimize its conclusions. 1t
is not pleasant to have to state that
the impartial character which it has
been the custom to attribute to the re-
ports of naturalists of high standing
has been greatly impaired by the i'm
patient subsection of this report to the
political exigencies of the situation.
1T is further to be regretted that the
report was so long delayed that no op-
pOrtunity was afforded this Government
TO examine it before the definite and
final rejection of the Presidents pro-
posals, based mainly upon its conclu-
Sions, was communicated to me. This
conduct recalls the incident which pre-
coded the arbitration at Paris, and
which came near rendering that arbi-
1ration abortiVe, when a similar report
of a British commission was withheld
7intil after the case of each Govern
nlent was exchanged and the report of
The commission was made public"
Lord Salisbury asserts that DR.. Jor-
dams report does not contain any facts
warranting the statement that there is
a depleted condition and prospective
early extinction of the herd. The note
OF your Embassy of the 10th ult does
not attribute such a statement to DR..
Jordan. but it is difficult to understand
how any one can read his report without
reaching the conclusion that such is the
condition of the herd. "
Here Secretary Sherman quotes feely
from the report for the purpose of sus-
tanning this contention. Continuing. he
says:
Professor Thompson's report is plain
1y written, with a view to minimize so
far as possible the depleted condition of
the herd on the Pribyloff Islands, and
requires a critical examination not pos
sible within the limits of the present in
struction, but its general purpose may
be briefly stated. It is to be regretted
that he should have contracted his study
far within the purview of his instruc-
lions. He confined his inquiry, and re-
fers to the subordinate subject of the
number of seals resorting to the islands,
and particularly to the relative number
in 1895 and 1896. The result of his
observance and inquiries seemed to be
that on some rookeries there was an in