INTERNATIONAL REGULATIONS OF FISHERIES ON THE HIGH SEAS. £27 
On April 18, 1892, a second modus vivendi was concluded embodying the 
provisions of the modus vivendi of 1891, with the added subject of compensation 
for damages to be paid “by the United States to Great Britain (for the use of her 
subjects) for abstaining from the exercise of that right during the pendency of 
the arbitration upon the bases of such a regulated and limited catch or catches 
as in the opinion of the arbitrators might have been taken without an undue 
diminution of the seal herds; and, on the other hand, if the result of the arbi- 
tration shall be to deny the right of British sealers to take the seals within said 
waters, then compensation shall be made by Great Britain to the United States 
(for itself, its citizens, and lessees) for this agreement to limit the island catch 
to seven thousand five hundred a season, upon the basis of the difference between 
this number and such larger catch as in the opinion of the arbitrators might 
have been taken without an undue diminution of the seal herds.’’ 
On February 29, 1892, the two Governments agreed to refer to a tribunal of 
seven jurists the question of jurisdiction over the fur seals in Bering Sea, and 
what concurrent regulations were desirable for their protection outside the juris- 
dictional limits of the respective Governments. The tribunal of arbitration 
met in Paris in 1893. The American claim of exclusive jurisdiction was not 
strongly pressed, and the principal issue was: ‘‘ Has the United States any right, 
and if so,, what right, of protection or property in the fur seals frequenting the 
islands of the United States in Bering Sea when such seals are found outside the 
ordinary three-mile limit.’’ 
On the question of property in the fur seals, the United States claimed that 
these are not entirely fere nature, but are in part domesticated, as is the honey 
bee; that ownership in the islands upon which fur seals breed, that their habit 
in regularly resorting thereto and rearing their young thereon, that their going 
out in search of food and regularly returning thereto, and all the facts and inci- 
dents of their relation to the islands gave to the United States a property inter- 
est therein; and that this was such a property interest as entitled the Govern- 
ment to preserve the herd from destruction by employment of such reasonable 
force as may be necessary, even at considerable distance from the islands. 
Irrespective of this distinctive right of property in the fur seals, the American 
Government claimed for itself and its people an interest and an industry in the 
proper use of the fur-seal herd on its territory, which it was entitled to protect 
against wanton destruction by individuals for the sake of the small and casual 
profits in that way to be gained; and that no part of the high seas is or ought 
to be used by individuals for the purpose of accomplishing the destruction of 
national interests of such a character and importance. Furthermore, the 
United States, alone possessing the power of preserving this valuable interest, 
was in a most just sense the trustee thereof for the benefit of mankind and 
should be permitted to discharge that trust without hindrance, 
