30 ARGUMENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 



from these that the seizures were made in Bering Sea at a greater 

 distance than three miles from the land ; and thereupon Lord Salisbury, 

 apparently assuming that the statutes of the United States which au- 

 thorized the seizures, were based upon some supposed jurisdiction over 

 Bering Sea acquired from Russia, addressed a note to Sir L. S. Sack- 

 ville West, in which he called attention to the Russian ukase of 1821, 

 which asserted a peculiar right in that sea, the objections of the 

 United States and Great Britain to that assertion, and the treaties 

 between those two nations, respectively, and Russia of 1824 and 1825, 

 and insisted that these documents furnished evidence conclusively show- 

 ing that the seizures were unlawful. 1 



The United States Government did not then reply to the point thus 

 raised; but its first attitude in relation to the matter was to suggest, 

 by notes addressed to the different maritime nations, that a peculiar 

 property Interest was involved, which might justify the United States 

 Government in exercising an exceptional marine jurisdiction; but that 

 inasmuch as the race of fur-seals was of great importance to commerce 

 and to mankind, it seemed the part of wisdom for the nations to con- 

 sider whether some concurrent measures might not be agreed to which 

 would, at the same time, preserve the seals and dispose of the cause of 

 possible controversy. 2 The first attitude, therefore, taken by the United 

 States was the suggestion of a property interest, and of an exceptional 

 maritime right to protect it by preventing the destruction of the seals; 

 but that all nations ought to unite in measures which would preserve 

 them, and thus avoid occasion for controversy concerning the right. 



On the 22d of January, 1800, Mr. Blaine, who had succeeded Mr. 

 Bayard as Secretary of State, had occasion to make answer, in a note 

 to Sir Julian Pauncefote, to further complaints on the part of the 

 British Government concerning the course of the United States 

 cruisers in intercepting Canadian vessels wmile engaged in taking fur- 

 seals in the waters of Bering Sea. In the outset of his communica- 

 tion Mr. Blaine begins by pointing out that it is unnecessary to discuss 

 any question of exclusive jurisdiction in the United States over the 

 waters of that sea, because there were other grounds upon which the 

 course of the United States was, in his opinion, fully justified. Ilethus 

 expresses himself: 



In the opinion of the President, the Canadian vessels arrested and 

 detained in the Behring Sea. were engaged in a pursuit that was in itself 



l Case of the United States. Appendix, Vol. i, p. 102. 

 ' J <:a.se oi'tlio United States. Appendix, Vol. I, p. 168, 



