220 



jurisdictional limits of tlie respective nations. The engagement of the 

 two Governments with resi^ect to regulations was that they would coop- 

 erate in wSecuring the adhesion of other powers "to such Eegulations" 

 as this Tribunal should prescribe. This could have referred only to 

 regulations which by their own force, without further action of the two 

 Governments, would j)roperly protect and preserve this race of ani- 

 mals. The adhesion of other nations to Eegulations which did not, in 

 themselves, secure the protection and preservation of this race, would 

 be of no value. 



One of the schemes before us is that proposed by Sir John Thompson. 

 I mean no disrespect to its distinguished author, whose good faith is not 

 questioned, wlien I say that, in view of all the evidence, that scheme 

 maybe fairly entitled "A plan for the certain and speedy extermina- 

 tion of the Pribilof herd of fur seals." Under regulations such as are 

 embodied in that i)lan all the seals, iucluding gravid females, would be 

 exposed to attack by pelagic sealers during the months of May and 

 June in the North Pacific Ocean; and during July, August, and Sej)- 

 tember in Bering Sea, outside of a zone of thirty miles around the 

 Pribilof Islands, nursing female seals could be slaughtered in vast 

 numbers. The use of rifles and nets are prohibited by this scheme, 

 while it saves to pelagic hunters the nse of the destructive shotgun 

 now in general use by them. A prohibition of rifles is of no value 

 whatever if the shotgun is allowed. Nor is it of the slightest conse- 

 quence that this scheme prohibits the killing of seals in Beriny Sea 

 (east of the line of demarcation adopted in the Treaty of 1867 between 

 Russia and the United States) he/ore the 1st of July and after October 

 lln each year; for, the seals can not be found in Bering Sea in any 

 numbers worth mentioning after October 1 and before July 1. I 

 object to this scheme upon the further ground that it allows either 

 Government upon notice to i)ut an end to our reguhitions after a named 

 time. Whatever this Tribunal may do in this matter, let that which 

 is done be final and permanent, subject only to such modifications 

 or change of policy as the two governments, in their wisdom, may 

 mutually agree to make. I see no objection to a reexamination from 

 time to time, by the two governments, of the subject of regulations but 

 there are many reasons against a reservation to each government of 

 the right to set aside the regulations after the lapse of any given time. 

 This whole subject has been a source of disturbance between these 

 nations for so long a period that the controversy should be now settled 



