58 ' PROTOCOLS. 



In coiiscquoiice they dccidcil t(» pass to the consideration of the con- 

 cun-ent leguhitions called for l)y Article VII of the treaty. 



Mr. Justice Harlan pre-enicd the follo\vin<i' draft of resolution: 



Jlcsolrcd, That tli(> pnrixj.so of Article VII of the treaty is to .secure, in any and all 

 events, the jirniicr jiroteition iiud preservation of the herd of seals frequenting the 

 Pribilof Islands; and in the iVaniing of regnlations, nnder the treaty, uo extent of 

 pelagic sealing should bo allowed which will seriously endanger the acconiplish- 

 uient of that end. 



Senator lAro/ijan and ^Ir. Justice Harlan voted for the adoption of 

 this resolution. 



Lord Hanneu and Mr. Greyers Gram declared that tliey abstain<Hl 

 from voting because they found the jiropositiou submitted to be of too 

 abstract a character. 



Sir Johu Thompson declined to vote on the following', among other 

 grounds: "That the treaty does not give power to the Tribunal to make 

 the provisions which may be ue(;essary in any and all erents for the 

 l)reservation of the seals, notably as to the preservation of the seals 

 on their breeding grounds." 



Marijuis Visconti Venosta voted against the i)ro])Osition. 



He remarked that, in order to secure the preservation of the fur seals, 

 the regulations onght to proN'ide a system of enactments ai)i)licable to 

 the whole area, where, on land as well as at sea, is (leveloi)ed the life 

 of the seals resorting to Uering Sea, and to be equally accepted by all 

 nations the citizens of whicli might compete in pelagic sealing. Such 

 regulations, however, would go beyond the powers of the Tribunal as 

 delined by the treaty. 



The; resi»onsibility of the arbitrators as to the result of their labors was 

 necessarily bounded by the limits of their mandate; they might simjjly 

 prescribe such measures, as they would judge consistent with the cir- 

 cumstances and with the decisions which they might have taken ou the 

 questions of right, and express the wish that these regulations receive 

 their necessary complement within the limits of the territorial Jurisdic- 

 tion of the two countries, and that they become the object of an under- 

 standing with the other nations. 



Baron de Courcel vofed against the i)roposition, because he looked 

 ui)Oii it, as did Lord Ilannen and Mr. Gregers Gram, as being too 

 abstract, and also, because in his opinion, the treaty, when it prescribed 

 the establishment of regulations for the proper protection and preser- 

 vation of the fur-seals, intended that given circumstances should be 

 taken into account; his view was that tlie preservation of this specaes 

 of animals sliould be regulated, not in the absolute interest of the 

 species, but in the interest of the human industries of which it is the 

 object, without the TribuiuU having to distinguish between the nature 

 of these ditlerent industries, whether they be exercised on land or 

 whether they be engaged upon at sea, and without it having to favor 

 one to the detriment of the other. 



