84 



Governraents in their long and exliaiistive diplomatic correspondence 

 and negotiations, and in agreeing to arbitration ni)on the whole " sub- 

 ject" of ijrotecting and preserving the fur-seal in Bering Sea, and re- 

 sorting to or frequenting that sea. But I think this matter is of sufficient 

 importance in its bearing upon the duties of this tribunal to justify me 

 in a concise statement of my views as to how the questions of dittbrence 

 arose between the United States and Great Britain, and how their 

 treatment gave rise to the questions formulated in the treaty. 



The United States seized some of the sealing vessels employed in 

 Bering Sea and they were condemned in their courts in Alaska, and 

 thereux^on the Government of Great Britain assumed the x>rotection of 

 vessels so emjiloyed under her flag, and made protest to the Govern- 

 ment of the United States against their seizure and confiscation and 

 against the arrest and punishment of her subjects sailing under the 

 British flag, and made a claim for damages in their behalf. 



The first seizure was an American vessel, August 1, 1886. Thus it 

 was this dii^lomatic controversy had its origin in the insistence of 

 Canada upon the claim of an unrestricted right of pelagic sealing 

 without regard to the preservation of seal life, or the rights of the 

 United States, or their interests; and it was, at first, confined to 

 pelagic hunting of fur seal in Bering Sea. It was the abuse that grew 

 up under the asserted right of pelagic sealing, as it was practiced by 

 the Canadians, and not the arrest of the vessels that gave origin to 

 this controversy. The initial point of the negotiations that resulted in 

 the treaty of February 29, 1892, was established in 1887. It was ex- 

 panded into this treaty and has drawn after it, as an incident, the 

 contention relating to jurisdiction over Bering Sea. 



The contentions of the two Governments were confined to questions 

 that affected their respective claims of rights, within Bering Sea, when 

 Mr. Phelps, minister to Great Britain, on November 11, 1887, brought 

 the subject to the attention of Lord Salisbury, and then proposed, on 

 the part of the Government of the United States, "that by mutual 

 agreement of the two Governments, a code of regulations should be 

 adopted," etc., for the preservation of the seals in Bering Sea, " entirely 

 irrespective of any question of conflicting jurisdiction in these waters." 



Mr. Phelps wrote to Mr. Bayard, as follows : 



His Lordship promptly acquiesced in this proposal, on the part of 

 Great Britain, and suggested that I should obtain from my Govern- 

 ment and submit to him a sketch of a system of regulations which 

 would be adequate for the puri>ose. 



