DECISIONS OF UNITED STATES COURTS. 121 



Showing imiiiistakably the uuderstanding of the Government at the 

 time as to what liad been acquired, and that our boundary line was lo- 

 cated at the one hundred and ninety-third degree of west longitude. 

 The longitude of a place is the arc of the equator interce])ted between 

 the meridian passing through that X)lace and some assumed meridian to 

 which all others are referred. Different nations have adopted different 

 meridians. The English reckon from the Eoyal Observatory at Green- 

 wich; the French from the Imperial Observatory at Paris, and the 

 Germans from the observatory at Berlin, or from the island of Ferro. 

 In the United States we sometimes reckon longitude from Washington 

 and sometimes from Greenwich. (See Loomis' Elements of Astronomy.) 

 But in establishing the western boundary line of Alaska the reckoning 

 of longitude was from Greenwich, which reaches the line dividing the 

 continents of Asia and North America. (See article 1 of the Treaty of 

 March, 1867.) 



The i3urchase of Alaska was unquestionably made with a view to the 

 revenues to be derived from the taking of fur-seal in the waters of 

 Bering Sea, and especially on the islands of St. Paul and St. George, 

 both of which were by act of Congress of March 3, 1869, made " a 

 special reservation for Government purposes." (See 15th Statute, 248.) 

 Secretary Seward was a skilled diplomat, a learned man in statecraft, 

 and he evidently foresaw the income to be derived by the Government 

 from the seal industry on and adjacent to those islands. Hence in the 

 negotiation he insisted upon and Eussia conceded that our boundary 

 line should be extended to the meridian named in the treaty. The in- 

 dustry and consequent revenues would be hopeless without the residu- 

 ary power of the United States to protect and regulate the taking of 

 fur-bearing animals in that part of our domain. The effort of the United 

 States to seize and drive out the illicit i^iratical craft that have been 

 navigating those waters for years, indiscriminately slaughtering fur- 

 bearing animals, the continuation of which can but result in the wanton 

 destruction of the rookeries, the most valuable in the world, is a legiti- 

 mate exercise of the i)owers of sovereignty under the law of nations, 

 with which no nation can lawfully interfere. The question of the con- 

 stitutionality of the act of Congress of July 27, 1868 (Eevised Stat- 

 utes, p. 343), scarcely deserves notice, since it has been sustained by 

 this court. (See United States v. Nelson, 29th Federal Eej)orter, j). 

 202. See same case affirmed by the United States circuit court for 

 Oregon, Weekly Federal Eeporter of April 19, p. 112. See also The 

 Louisa Simx)Son, 2 Sawyer.) 



The conclusion I have reached is that the demurrermust be overruled, 

 and it is so ordered,- and that judgment of forfeiture to the United 

 States be entered against each of the vessels separately, together with 

 their tackle, apparel, furniture, and cargoes, saving to the masters and 

 mates their imvate property, such as nautical instruments and the like, 

 and that a stay of proceedings for ninety days be granted as per stipu- 

 lation filed. 



United States vs. Schooner James G. Swan, etc. 



[United States District Court, District of WasMngton, Northern Division.] 

 OPINION FILED MARCH 26, 1892. 



Hanford, J. 



Fur-seals in great numbers habitually make annual visits to the Pri- 

 bilof Islands, in Bering Sea, affording to the native inhabitants their 

 1(J 



