ARGUMENTS ON PRELIMINARY MOTIONS. 141 



letter on page 462, you will find a long" despatcli from Lord Salisbury 

 to Sir Julian Pauucefote arguing out the question of right and the 

 illegality of the seizure of the British vessels. That, Sir, is the 22iid 

 of May, 1890. Will you then, Sir, go on to page 481 f 



The President. — Is there any mention of Arbitration in this 

 despatch. 



Sir Charles Russell. — In this particular letter — IS'o. It was com- 

 bating the argument of Mr. Blaine affirming that the United States 

 were justilied m doing what they had done. If you will then, Sir, go on 

 to page 481 of the same volume. 



The President. — That may be called argument on the legal point. 



Sir Charles Russell. — Yes, on the legal points strictly. Sir. On 

 page 481, at the top, you will see the document No. 3(30. Now, Sir, at 

 this time (I have not troubled you with the intermediate correspond- 

 ence) they were getting closer upon the point of Arbitration agreement 

 as to right, and as to damages, and they were also getting closer to 

 Arbitration agreement upon the point of Regulations; and the question 

 arose what was to be done, as the sealing season was beginning about 

 June — what was to be done to prevent injury to the sealing (so called) 

 "industry" at that time, and in answer to a demand from the United 

 States that something should be done in the interim. Lord Salisbury 

 was requested, having stated that he had no legal authority, and the 

 English Executive no legal authority except under statute law, to pro- 

 hibit acts by their nationals, — he was requested to give some public 

 notification which might have, although not legally binding, some 

 operation on the action, and control the action, of Canadian sealers. 

 Accordingly he telegraphs to Sir Julian Pauncefote on the 12th of 

 June : — " Referring to my previous telegram of today's date, if we could 

 come to terms on this proposal he would suggest some such kind of 

 proclamation as the following: — Whereas the United States and Her 

 Majesty's Government have agreed to refer to Arbitration the legality 

 of the United States in nmking certain captures of British vessels in 

 the Behring Sea, and whereas the United States have engaged if the 

 award should be adverse to them to pay compensation not only for that 

 interference, but for any loss arising from abstention from sealing con- 

 sequent on this Proclamation, captains are hereby requested not to seal 

 in Behring Sea during the present season." 



Mr. Phelps.— Was that the season of 1890 or of 1891? 



Sir Charles Russell. — 1890. On the 3rd of June Sir Julian 

 Pauncefote writes this. It is the next document. 



" I have the honor to inform your Lordship that since the recei])t of 

 Mr. Blaine's note of the 29th ultimo, informing me of the rejection of 

 the draft Convention by his Government" — that is to say the Conven- 

 tion for Regulations put forward on the 29th April — "I have been in 

 constant communication with him with view of coming to some possible 

 settlement of the Behring Sea question. On the 30th ultimo Mr. Blaine 

 informed me that he was to have an interview with the President, the 

 result of which he promised to communicate to me as soon as possible. 

 I accordingly received a note from him last night, a copy of which is 

 enclosed herewith, in which he states that the President is of opinion 

 that an arbitration could not be concluded in time for this season, but 

 he is anxious to know whether Lord Salisbury, in order to promote a 

 friendly solution of the question, will make for a single season the 

 Regulation which in 1888 he offered to make permanent. Your Lord- 

 ship Avill observe that the above proposal is identical with that con- 

 tained at the conclusion of Mr. Blaine's note of the 29th ultimo. In 



