PROTOCOLS. 59 



In consoqnence, the resolution offered by Mr. Justice Harlan was 

 rejected. 



Mr. Justice Harlan then inesented the following motion: 



This Tribunal has power, and it is its duty, nuder the treaty, to prescribe such 

 coucurreut regnhitious, coveviug the waters, outside the jurisdictional limits of the 

 two countries, of both Bering Sea and the North Pacific Ocean, traversed by the 

 fur-seals in, or habitually resorting to, Bering Sea, as may be found necessary for 

 the ])roper protection and preservation of such seals, even if such regulations, when 

 sanctioned by legislation of the two Governments, should, by reason of tlieir express 

 provisions, or l)y their practical operation, result in preventing the hunting and 

 taking of these seals during the seasons Avhen the condition of said waters admits 

 of fur-seals being taken Ijy pelagic sealers. 



Senator Morgan and Mr. Justice Harlan voted in favor of this motion. 



Lord Haniien declined to vote on the ground, amongst others, that 

 the arbitrators are not called on to vote on abstract questions apart 

 from the facts as to which their decision is to be given. 



Sir John Thompson declined to vote, for the following, among other, 

 reasons: 



Tliat the views of the several arbitrators on this and other abstract questions relat- 

 ing to regulations have been better expressed during the deliberations of the past 

 weeks than in the form of the present resolution. 



Mr. Gram abstained from voting on the ground that the resolution 

 proposed will have for him no practical value, as his vote on regula- 

 tions will not in any way be affected by such question. 



Marquis Visconti Venosta likewise abstained from voting. 



He believed that the treaty, in its Article VII, had in view the 

 restriction and not the j)rohibition of the exercise of the right of pelagic 

 sealing on the high sea. He was disx)osed to vote for efficacious meas- 

 ures in order to prevent what might be essentially destructive for the 

 species in this fishing. But after having recognized the right, he did 

 not feel authorized, by the interpretation of the treaty, to suppress it 

 l)ractically, either by an absolute prohibition or by measures which 

 would be equivalent thereto. 



Baron de Courcel might agree to the principle expressed in the 

 motion, but declined to vote upon it as being purely abstract. 



The motion was in consequence not adopted. 



The Tribunal then proceeded to the drafting of the text of the con- 

 current regulations which it was charged to determine by virtue of 

 Article VII of the treaty. 



Mr. Justice Harlan submitted the following draft, of which Senator 

 Morgan expressed his approval: 



Articlk 1. No citizen or subject of the United States or Great Britain shall in any 

 manner kill, capture, or pursue anywhere upon the seas, within tlie limits and bound- 

 aries next hereinafter prescribed for the operation of this regulation, any of the 

 animals commonly called fur-seals. 



AuT. 2. The foregoing regulation shall apply to and extend over all those waters, 

 outside the jurisdictional limits of the above-mentioned nations, of the North Pacific 



