JURISDICTIONAL RIGHTS IN BERING SEA. 297 



a prescribed penalty. It will be observed that the inhibition is not 

 alone against British snbjects, but against ''any person." J here quote 

 the i^ertineut section of the Parliamentary act in question: 



7 (1) The fishing board may, by by-hiw or by-hiws, direct that the methods of 

 fishing known as beam traAvling and other trawling shall not be used within a line 

 drawn from Duucansby Head, in Caithness, to l\attray l^oint, in Aberdeenshire, in 

 any area or areas to be defined in such by-law, and may irom time to time make, alter, 

 aud revoke by-laws for the purposes of this section, but no such by-law shall be of 

 any validity until it has been confirmed by the secretary for Scotland. 



(2) Any person who uses any such method of fishing in contravention of any such 

 by-law shall be liable, on conviction under the summary jurisdiction (Scotland; acts, 

 to a fine not exceeding £5 for the first otfense, and not exceeding £20 for the second 

 or any subsequent ofi'ense, and every net set, or attem])ted to be set, in contraA^ention 

 of any such by-law, may be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of as in the 

 sixth section of this act mentioned. 



If Great Britain may thus control an area of 2,700 square miles of 

 ocean on the coast of Scotland why may not the United States pre- 

 scribe a space around the Pribilof Islands in which similar prohibitions 

 may be enforced? The following wotdd be the needed legislation for 

 such a purpose by Congress, and it is but a iiaraphrase of the act of 

 Parliament: 



The fur-seal board may, by by-laAV or by-laws, direct that the methods of sealing 

 known as spearing or harpooning, or with firearms, shall not be used within a line 

 drawn from the shores of the Pribilof Islands GO miles in the Behring Sea, and said 

 board may, from time to time, make, alter, and revoke by-laAvs for the purpose of 

 this section; but no such by-law shall be of any validity until it has been confii-med 

 by the Secretary of the Treasury. 



Second. Any person who uses any such method of sealing in contravention of such 

 by-laws shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $100 for the first ofi'ense 

 and not exceeding sf'500 for the second or any subsequent ofi'ense, and every spear, 

 harpoon, or firearm attempted to be used in contravention of any such by-l<aw may 

 be seized and destroyed or otherwise disposed of as said fur-seal board may direct. 



It must not escape observation that the area of water outside the 

 3-mile line on the coast of Scotland, whose control is assumed by Great 

 Britain, is as large as would be found inside a line drawn from Cape 

 Cod to Portland Harbor, on the New England coast. 



Lord Salisbury reasserts his contention that words " Pacific Ocean" 

 at the time of the treaty between Russia aiul Great Britain did include 

 Behring Sea. Undoubtedly the Pacific Ocean includes Behring Sea in 

 the same sense that the Atlantic Ocean includes the Gulf of Mexico, 

 and yet it would be regarded as a very inaccurate statement to say that 

 the Mississippi Eiver tlows into the Atlantic Ocean. I think Lord Sal- 

 isbury fails to recognize the common distinction between the "Atlantic 

 Ocean" and '' the waters of the Atlantic." While the Mexican Gulf 

 is not a part of the Atlantic Ocean, it would, I am sure, comport with 

 general usage to say that it belonged to the waters of the Atlantic, 

 and, while Behring Sea is not technically a part of the Pacific Ocean, it 

 undoubtedly belongs to the waters of the Pacific. 



The English Channel would not ordinarily be understood as included 

 in the term " Atlantic Ocean." One would not say that Denver or Calais 

 is on the coast o1 the Atlantic Ocean, and yet clearly the English Chan 

 nel belongs to the Avaters of the Atlantic. In point of fact, therefore, 

 according to the usage of the world, there is no dispute of any conse- 

 quence between the two Governments on the geographical point under 

 consideration. The historical point is the one at issue. The explana- 

 tory note from liussia, filed in the State Department of this country, 

 specially referred to in Mr. John Quincy Adams's diary and quoted in 

 my note of December 17, 1800, plainly draws a distinction bet\ve<'n tlio 

 Pacific Ocean on the one hand, and the " Sea of Okhotsk, the Sea of 

 38 



