ORAL ARGUMENT OF JAMES C. CARTER, ESQ. 263 



be laid, before them, with such other evidenco as either Goveruuient may submit. 

 The contracting powers furthermore agree to cooperate in securing the adhesion of 

 other powers to such reguhitions. 



Lord Salisbury desires to make the following two reservations on the 

 above article: 



His lordship understands, first, that the necessity of any regulations is left to the 

 Arbitrators, as well as the nature of those regulations, if the necessity is in their 

 judgment proved; secondly, that the regulations will not become obligatory on 

 Great Britain and the United States until tliey have been accepted by the other 

 maritime powers. Otherwise, as his lordship observes, the two Governments would 

 be simply handing over to others the right of exterminating the seals. 



I have no doubt that you will have no difficulty in concurring in the above reser- 

 vations, and subject thereto I shall be prepared to sign the articles as proposed. 

 I have, etc., 



Julian Pauncefote. 



A copy of that note was furnished to Mr. Blaine, and his answer is 

 found on the following page, 340: 



DicPAKT.MENT OP STATE, JVaskington, Novcmhev 27, 1S91. 



Sir: In the early part of last week you furnished the exact points which had 

 been agreed u))on for arbitration in the matter of the Behriug Sea negotiation. You 

 called later and corrected the language which introduced the agreement. In fact, the 

 two copies framed were taken entirely from your minutes. It was done with a view 

 that you and I should sign them, and thus authenticate the points for the Arbitra- 

 tors to consider. 



You inform me now that Lord Salisbury asks to make two reservations in the 

 sixth article. His first reservation is that '* the necessity of any regulation is left 

 to the Arbitrators, as well as the nature of those regulations if the necessity is 

 in their judgment proved." 



What reason has Lord Salisbury for altering the text of the article to which he 

 had agreed? It is to be presunnnl that if regulations are needed they will be made. 

 If they are not needed the arbitrators will not make them. The agreement leaves 

 the arbitrators free upon that point. The first reservation, therefore, has no special 

 meaning. 



The second reservation which Lord Salisbury makes is that " the regulations shall 

 not become obligatory on Great Britain and the United States until they have been 

 accepted by the other maritime powers." Does Lord Salisburj'^ mean that the United 

 States and Great Britian shall refrain from taking seals until every maritime power 

 joins in the regulations? Or does he mean that sealing shall be resumed the 1st of 

 May next and that we shall proceed as before the Arbitration until the regulations 

 have been accepted by the other "maritime powers?" 



"Maritime powers" may mean one thing or another. Lord Salisbury did not say 

 the principal maritime powers. France, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Austria, Turkey, 

 Russia, Germany, Sweden, Holland, Belgium, are all maritime powers in the sense 

 that they maintain a navy, great or small. In like manner, Brazil, the Argentine 

 Confederation, Chile, Peru, Mexico, and Japan are maritime powers. It would 

 require a long time, three years at least, to get the assent of all these powers. Mr. 

 Bayard, on the 19th of August, 1887, addressed Great Britain, Germany, France, 

 Russia, Sweden and Norway, and Japan with a view to securing some regulations in 

 regard to the seal in Behring Sea. France, Japan, and Russia replied with languid 

 indifi'erence. Great Britain never replied in writing. Germany did not reply at all. 

 Sweden and Norway said the matter was of no interest to them. Thus it will be 

 again. Such a proposition will postpone the matter indefinitely. 



The President regards Lord Salisbury's second reservation, therefore, as a material 

 change in the terms of the arbitration agreed upon by this Government; and he 

 instructs me to say that he does not feel willing to take it into consideration. He 

 adheres to every point of agreement which has been made between the two powers, 

 according to the text which you furnished. He will regret if Lord Salisbury shall 

 insist on a substantially new agreement. He sees no objection to submitting the 

 agreement to the principal maritime powers for their assent, but he can not agree 

 that Great Britaiii and the United States shall make their adjustment dependent on 

 the action of third parties who have no direct interest in the seal fisheries, or that 

 the settlement shall be postponed until those third parties see fit to act. 

 I have, etc., 



James G. Blaine. 



Lord Salisbury was not quite satisfied with that answer; and another 

 letter, or other letters, were written in refereuce to it, and resjionses 



