170 ORAL ARGUMENT OF SIR CHARLES RUSSELL, Q. C. M. P. 



Tikbmenieff thus describes the result of these repi-esentations: 



The exact words of the letter from the Foreign office are as follows: 



923 The iixing of a line at sea within which foreign vessels should be probibited 

 from whaling off our shores would not be in accordance with the spirit of the 



Convention of 1824, and would be contrary to the i^rovisions of our Convention of 

 3825 with Great Britain. Moreover, the adoption of such a measure, without ])re- 

 limiuary negotiation and arrangements with the other Powers, might lead to protests, 

 since no clear and uniform agreement has yet been arrived at among nations in 

 regard to the limit of jurisdiction at sea. 



In 1847 a representation from Governor Tebenkof in regard to new aggressions on 

 the part of the whalers gave rise to further correspondence. Sometime before, in 

 June 1846, the Governor General of Eastern Siberia had expressed his opinion that, 

 in order to limit the whaling operations of foreigners, it would be fair to forbid tbem 

 to come within 40 Italian miles of our shores, the ports of Petropaulovsk and Okhotsk 

 to be excluded, and a payment of 100 silver roubles to be demanded at those ports 

 from every vessel for the right of whaling. He recommended that a ship of war 

 should be employed as a cruiser to watch foreign vessels. 



Now there is a distinct claim addressed to the Government for pro- 

 tection. This is the answer: 



The Foreign Office expressly stated as follows in reply : 

 This is again a textual quotation. 



We have no right to exclude foreign ships from that part of the Great Ocean 

 which separates the eastern shore of Siberia from the northwestern shore of America, 

 or to make the payment of a sum of money a condition to allowing them to take 

 whales. 



What was that sea which is part of the Great Ocean unless it was 

 the Behring Sea — that part of the Great Ocean which separates the 

 eastern shore of Siberia from the north-western shore of America? May 

 1 call the attention of the Tribunal to the map? What is the sea that 

 separates Siberia, on the one hand, from the north-west coast of America 

 on the other, unless it is the Behring Sea; and what is the Great Ocean 

 of which that intervening sea is described as part unless it is the Great 

 South Sea, or the Pacific Ocean? The language is indubitable and 

 unmistakeable. 



Tikhmenieff continues, 



The Foreign Office were of opinion that the fixing of the line referred to above 

 would re-open the discussions formerly carried on between England and France on 

 the subject. The limit of a cannon-shot, that is, about three Italian miles, would 

 alone give rise to no dispute. The Foreign Office observed in conclusion, that no 

 Power had yet succeeded in limiting the freedom of fishing in open seas, 



that is literally, historically true; 



and that such pretensions had never been recognized by the other Powers. They 

 were confident that the fitting out of colonial cruisers would put an end to all diffi- 

 culties; there had not yet been time to test the efficacy of this measure. 



That is with reference to preventing raiding upon the islands and 

 coasts. Then there is another statement there with further details, 

 bringing it down to a later period. 



The President. — Is the authority of this official gentleman acknowl- 

 edged by the other party? 



924 Sir Charles Kussell. — Yes, I thought I read a moment ago 

 a passage in which, referring to the very pages I am reading from 



(pages 83 to 90) — the United States referred to these quotations in our 

 Case. 



The President. — I mean the quotations from the Eussian official 

 documents? 



Sir Charles Eussell. — ^Yes, I thought the Tribunal would have 

 appreciated my reference. I referred to page 24 of their Couuter-Oase, 



