ARGUMENTS ON PRELIMINARY MOTIONS. 43 



Salisbury ensued, extending; from early in July to the middle of Novem- 

 ber, 1891. The various subjects which were to be discussed, and the 

 points which were to be decided, by the Arbitrators in the affair of the 

 Behrinji- sea were agreed upon in this correspondence. A month later 

 Sir Julian Pauncefote, the British Minister, and myself arranged the 

 correspondence and reduced the propositions to a Memorandum which 

 was signed by us on the 18th December." (That sustains the remark in 

 respect of the history of this Treaty that I made yesterday.) "Subse- 

 quently, the questions which had arisen between the two Governments 

 concerning the jurisdictional rights of the United States in the waters 

 of the Behringsea were ex])ressed in the form of a Treaty concluded at 

 Washington on the 29th February, 1892. This Treaty was confirmed 

 by the Senate on the 29th March, 1892, ratified by the President on the 

 22nd April, ratifications exchanged on the 7th May, and proclaimed on 

 the 9th May, 1892. In all these steps, including the correspondence with 

 Lord Salisbury, the Memorandum concluded between Sir Julian and 

 myself, and the Treaty that was ultimately proclaimed on the 9th May, 

 1892, and which was negotiated by Sir Julian and myself, not one word 

 was said or intimated respecting the question now raised by the British 

 Government as to a secondary submission of evidence after the first 

 five points set forth in Article VI had been decided by the Arbitrators. 

 It was never intimated that any other mode of proceeding should be 

 had than that which is expressed in Articles III, IV and V of the 

 Treaty." Articles III, IV and V of the Treaty are those which pro- 

 vided for the Case, the Counter Case, and the Argument. That is Mr. 

 Blaine's statement. I will read, as the Book is before me, the conclud- 

 ing passages of Mr. Secretary Foster's last letter to I^ord Rosebery in 

 terminating this correspondence, and enclosing to him tin's paper signed 

 by Mr. Blaine. He had argued this Case very fully and very clearly, 

 as it seems to me, through this correspondence; and be concludes: 

 "Having thus expressed the views entertained by the Government of 

 the United States upon the argument of Lord Kosebery in support of his 

 interpretation of the Treaty, it remains for me to add that I am 

 instructed by the President to say that he appreciates the spirit of 

 equity and liberality in which Lord Rosebery, while insisting upon his 

 own interpretation, practically to some extent at least, and I hopefully, 

 yields to the Government of the United Stiftes the benefit of its inter- 

 pretation by furnishing to the latter the separate Report of Her 

 Majesty's Commissioners, with the permission that the same be treated 

 as part of the original Case on the part of Great liritain. If, as I 

 believe and assume, this Report contains substantially all the matter 

 which Her Majesty's Government will rely upon to support its conten- 

 tions in res])ect to the nature and habits of fur-seals, and the modes of 

 capturing them, I entertain a confident hope that all further difficulty 

 upon the questions discussed in this note may be avoided. I deem 

 it necessary, however, to say that the Government of the United States 

 will, should occasion arise, firmly insist upon its interpretation of the 

 Treaty, and that it reserves the right to ])rotest against and oppose the 

 submission to, and reception by the Arbitrators of anj^ matter which 

 may be inserted in the British Counter Case which may not be justified 

 as relevant by way of reply to the Case of the United States." 



The President. — That is previous to the Counter Case having been 

 given over. 



Mr. Phelps. — Yes. 



General Foster. — Three months before. 



