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



such rifihts grow out of tbe cession by Russia of any 8i)ecial rights or jurisdiction 

 held by her in such iisheries or in the waters of Behring Sea, or out of the ownership 

 of the breeding islands and tbe habits of tbe seals in resorting thither and rearing 

 their young thereon and going out from the islands for food, or out of any other 

 fact or incident connected with the relation of those seal hsheries to the territorial 

 possessions of the United States. 



940 Kow, shortly stated, that question is briefly this : Wiiat are now 

 the rights of the United States as to tlie seal fisheries in the 



waters of Behring Sea outside the ordinary territorial limits, however 

 such rights have arisen. Seal fisheries in the waters of Behring Sea: 

 those are the words. 



In further elucidation of that same meaning, I may point to question 

 6 which he suggests shall be as follows: 



If the determination of the foregoing questions shall leave the subject in such 

 position that the concurrence of Great Britain is necessary in ])rescribing regulations 

 for the killing of the fur seal in any part of the waters of Behring Sea, then it shall 

 be further determined: First, how far, if at all, outside the ordinary territorial 

 limits it is necessary that the United States should exercise an exclusive jurisdiction 

 in order to protect the seal for the time living upon the islands of the United States 

 and breeding therefrom. Second, whether a closed season (during which the killing 

 of seals in the waters of Behring Sea outside the ordinary territorial limits shall be 

 prohibited) is necessary to save the seal fishing industry, so valuable and important 

 to mankind, from deterioration or destruction — 



and so forth. 



i^ow in the answer on page 290 of the same volume, Lord Salisbury, 

 writing to Sir Julian Pauncefote on February 21st, criticizes these ques- 

 tions. As to the 5th question he says, at page 294, 



The first clause, what are now the rights of the United States as to the far seal 

 fisheries in the waters of the Behring Sea outside of the ordinary territorial limits? 

 is a question which would be very properly referi'ed to the decision of an Arbitrator. 



Now T pass on. The next letter to-which I desire to refer, is from Sir 

 Julian Pauncefote to Mr. Wharton, on page 326. There, Sir Julian 

 Pauncefote writing to Mr. Wharton says: 



Either Government may submit to the Arbitrators any claim for compensation 



which it may desire to prefer against the other Government in respect of any losses 

 or injuries — 



You will observe the large words in which Sir Julian Pauncefote pro- 

 poses the reference. 



any losses or injuries in relation to the fur-seal fishery in Behring Sea. 



And so on. 



Mr. Wharton replies on the 23rd of July, at page 326. He replies 

 proposing instead this clause, Mdiich you will see printed in small type 

 on page 398. 



The Government of Great Britain having presented the claims of its subjects for 

 compensation for the seizui-e of their vessels by the United States in Behring Sea 



that matter is to be referred to the Arbitrators. Then I go on, next, to 

 the letter of Mr. Blaine to Sir Julian Pauncefote of the 4th of May 1891. 

 This is distinctly in relation to the Modus Vivendi. It is at page 301. 

 Mr. Blaine there writes proposing the following arrangement. 



The Government of the United States limits the number of seals to be killed on 

 the islands, for purposes just described, to 7,500. 



941 The Government of the United States guarantees that no seals shall be killed 

 in the open waters of the Behring Sea by any person on any vessel sailing 



ander the American flag or any American citizen sailing under any other flag. 



The Government of Great Britain guarantees that no seals shall be killed in the 

 open waters of the Behring Sea by any person. 



and so on. 



