ARGUMENT OF GREAT BRITAIN. 13 



The points raised by these questions are met by Great 

 Britain in this written argument by establishing the fol- 

 lowing principal propositions: 



PROPOSITIONS MAINTAINED IN PART I OF THE ARGUMENT 

 OF GREAT BRITAIN. 



1. That the size and geographical conditions of Behring 

 Sea are such that no nation has a right to close the sea 

 against the navigation of the ships of other nations; nor 

 to claim or assert territorial dominion over the sea; nor to 

 claim or assert the right of jurisdiction, nor to exercise 

 jurisdiction, over the sea beyond the 3 miles of territorial 

 waters, as recognized by international law. 



^. That Behring Sea is the high sea, and forms part of 

 the Pacific Ocean ; and that no nation has a right to claim, 

 assert, or exercise jurisdiction on the sea in any other 

 cases than those recognized by international law. 



3. That, in 1821 only, and at no other time, Eussia 

 12 asserted a jurisdiction over so much of Behring Sea 

 as was included in a belt of 100 Italian miles from 

 the shores of her territories : 



That she never exercised such jurisdiction, but, on the 

 protest of the United States and Great Britain, immediately 

 withdrew her assertion of it, and limited her claim to the 

 3 miles of territorial waters recognized by international 

 law: 



That Russia did not at any time assert or exercise jurisdic- 

 tion over the whole of Behring Sea, nor claim to close that 

 sea, nor did she at any time assert or exercise the rights of 

 territorial dominion over any part of such sea. 



4. That the withdrawal of the claim to 100-mile juris- 

 diction was confirmed by both the Treaties which Russia 

 entered into (1) with the United States in 1824, and (2) with 

 Great Britain in 1825. 



5. That the United States acquired from Russia, under 

 the Treaty of 1867, no rights beyond the sovereignty of 

 the ceded territories (which did not include any part of 

 Behring Sea) and the right of jurisdiction over the 3 miles 

 of territorial waters as recognized by international law; 

 and that the United States have no right, in virtue of their 

 possessions on the shores and the islands of Behring Sea, 

 to any dominion over that sea, or to any jurisdiction in its 

 waters, other than that recognized by international law in 

 the 3 miles of territorial waters. 



6. That it was beyond the right of the United States to 

 make laws under which British vessels could be con- 

 demned by the United States Courts, or under which the 

 United States cruizers could interfere with British vessels 

 engaged in i)elagic sealing in Behring Sea, and that such 

 laws were legitimately disregarded by British subjects. 



VARYING CHARACTER OF UNITED STATES CONTENTION. 



Ill view of the great complexity and varying nature of 

 the United States contention, the following brief survey 

 of the manner in which their case has been presented isi 

 Plibmitted. 



