336 ALASKA INDUSTRIES. 



first section of the seal-fishery (North Pacific) act of 1893, which expired 

 by limitation on the 1st instant, and for which the present pending bill 

 is to be substitnted. This clause is as follows: 



If during tbe period and within the seas specified by the order a British ship is 

 found liaving on board thereof fishing or shooting iniiileiuents, or seal skins, or bodies 

 of seals, it shall be on the owner or master of such ship to prove that the ship was 

 not used or employed in contravention of this act. 



A similar provision was contained in the seal-fisheries (Bering Sea) 

 act of 1891, upon which the modus viveudi of 1891 and 1892 was founded, 

 clause 5 of section 1 of which provided as follows : 



If a British ship is found within Bering Sea having on board thereof fishing or 

 shooting implements, or seal skins, or bodies of seals, it shall be on tbe owner or 

 master of such ship to prove that the ship was not used or employed in contraven- 

 tion of this act. 



Inasmuch as the pending bill expressly states that its provisions shall 

 not be in derogation of the provisions of the Bering Sea award act of 

 1894, but in addition thereto, this omission is significant and becomes 

 of the utmost importance. 



Under the Bering Sea award act of 1894, enacted to carry out the 

 provisions of the Paris award, the subject-matter of orders in council is 

 strictly limited to provisions for carrying into efi'ect the schedule pro- 

 visions (that is, the Paris award and the merchants' shipping act), and 

 for giving the necessary authority to United States of^cers to seize 

 British vessels which have violated the award provisions. 



The scope of such orders in council as may be issued under said act 

 is also limited to the area designated in said award. 



The seal-fishery (North Pacific) act of 1893, however, extends the 

 scope of the orders in council to all of the Pacific Ocean and Bering 

 Sea north of the forty-second parallel of latitude, and, further, gives 

 the widest latitude to said orders as to limitations, conditions, qualifi- 

 cations and exceptions, which appear to Her Majesty in council expe- 

 dient for carrying into effect the object of this act as expressed in the 

 title, "For prohibiting the catching of seals at certain periods in Bering 

 Sea and other parts of the Pacific Ocean adjacent to Bering Sea." 



If, therefore, the pending bill should reenact the clause above quoted, 

 in which the presumption of illegality is drawn from the presence of 

 implements or seal skins on board, it would be possible by subsequent 

 orders in council to bring the British law into harmony with that 

 enacted by Congress upon this question, to which I have had the honor 

 in previous communications to call to your attention. Should, however, 

 the pending bill become law with said clause omitted, I fear that it may 

 prove a source of embarrassment in the effort to properly enforce the 

 provisions of the Paris award in the future. I have the honor to request, 

 if such course be approved by you, that our ambassador at London be 

 instructed to present tliese views to the British Government. 

 Very resijectfully, 



0. S. Hamlin, Acting Secretary. 



The Secretary of State. 



July 18, 1895. 



Sir: Eeferring to my letter to you of the 8th instant, wherein it was 

 stated that on the 27th ultimo the collector of customs at San Fran- 

 cisco had reported to the United States attorney at said port the action 

 of the master of the sealing schooner So])hia Sutherland in taking seals 



