Evening star., 1938-02-27

IN HE Sunday Star Of February l3 con-
tains an article relative to the
Alaska salmon fishery and the re-
cent invasion thereof by the Jap
anese. The article Is an excellent state
ment of the position of the japanese and
OF the hopes entertained by that nation to
share largely in the Alaska salmon fishery,
II not to nonopolize it. The writer of the
article indicates as his opinion that the
legislation which have proposed tH. R.
834D namely, to declare the salmon
spawned and Matched in the rivers and
lakes OF Alaska to be the property of the
United States, and to authorize and to
exercise jurisdiction over the waters ad-
jacent to the coast of Alaska as we'll with
out as within the so-called 3-nile limit on
the continental shelf. for the purpose of
protecting and preserving the Alaska SAL
mon fishery, is not of any avail by reason
OF the decision of the Arbitral Tribunal in
the fur seal case, and that, accordingly, it
will be necessary to treat with the jap
anese and ultimately, through a conven-
tioE or treaty similar to that made with
respect to fur seals, to pay the japanese
to abstain from exhausting the Alaska
salmon fishery.
Seal Decision Doesn't Apply,
The decision made by the fur seal tri-
bunal Is not controlling as regards the
bill for the protection of the Alaska SAL
mon fishery, for the following reasons:
l. The fur seal adjudication was made in
1893, more than A years ago. During that
period striking mechanical developments
have taken place in all lines of industry.
nshng as we'll as others. The boats and
gear used in fishing at the present day
are much more effective and efficient than
those which were used in 1893 and before
AT the present time comparatively few
ships with modern gear may exhaust the
salmon fishery of the entire world within
very lew years. In order to prevent the
absolute extinction of the valuable sources
OF food supply which may be obtained from
the sea, particularly the salmon, it is
necessary to extend to other directions,
and make new applications of the settled
principles Of international law, which now
permit, and have always permitted. of
proper protection of nations industries.
as well as of its citizens, and of the de-
fense Of the realm. In this as in other
cases the law must be adjusted to meet not
only the mechanical developments of
civilized society, but also meet the modified
or changed economic requirements of that
society.
2 In the fur seal case we not only agreed
with Great Britain, but, indeed, asserted
that miles constituted the limit of
ordinary territorial waters" which, how
ever, was not then the fact, and GER
when we f1nd a substantial ma joritv of
the civilized nations Of the world rejecting
tainly is not true Of present-day conditions
the 3-mile limit rule.
Excerpt From Case.
8. With respect to the seal herds, 1t was
proved beyond any dispute that the pelagic
sealing of foreign nationals, which the
United States tried to terminate by the
seizures made in 1886, had been carried
on for years prior thereto. The following
excerpt from the case of Great Britain
Cur Seal Arbitration volume 4, page 86)
was never successfully disputed:
1T is found that from 1867 down to and
including 1885, vessels continued to visit
and hunt in Bering Sea without interfer-
ence when outside of the ordinary terri
torial jurisdiction"
AS before stated, it was agreed that the
Ordinary territorial Jurisdiction" extended
only miles from shore.
81.
that vessels from even the Sandwich Is
lands took seals from the Pribilofs in COM
petition with vessels from New England
DID,, page 49,
In Alaska We are not confronted with
any such situation. The salmon packing
industry there from its earliest inception
until the present moment has been exclu-
sively an American industry. The recent
invasion Of the japanese was made clan
destinely and surreptitiously and at time
when the japanese government denied
that any such salmon packing operations
in the water adjacent to the coast of Alaska
were being carried on by the nationals
of that country.
MAKO compete Clrcie.
T. In 1889, several years before the fur
seal arbitration, Congress had expressly de-
clined to assert the right of our Govern
ment to protect the fur seals in Bering Sea
beyond miles from our shores. In that
year an effort was made to amend the law
80 as to make it Include and apply to" all
the waters of Bering Sea east OF the line
described in the Treaty of Cession. On Feb
ruary %, 1889, q bill relative to the salmon
fishery of Alaska, which had heretofore
passed the Senate was reported from the
House Committee on Merchant Marine and
Fisheries, and on the same day Mr.. Dunn
Of Arkansas offereds an amendment by
which it was proposed to declare that Sec
ton 1856 of the United States Revised
Statutes, which prohibits the killing Of any
otter, mink, marten, sable or fur seal, or
other fur-bearing animal, within the
limits of Alaska Territory, or in the waters
thereof" should Include and apply to all
the waters in Bering Sea in Alaska en-
brased within the boundary lines mentioned
and described in the Treaty with Russia"
By which Aaska was ceded to the United