320 DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONPENCE. 



i?luill tlien detei'iuiiie what coiicuneut i(\i;ulatioiis outside the jurio- 

 (lictional limits of the respective Goveriinieiits are necessary, and over 

 Avliat waters such reguhitions shoiikl extend; and, to aid them in that 

 determination, the report of tlie Joint Commission, to be appointed by 

 the respective Governments, shall be laid before them, with such other 

 evidence as either Government may submit. The contracting- powers 

 furthermore agree to cooperate in securing the adhesion of other powers 

 to such regulations. 



In your note of the 3d instant you propose, on behalf of Her Majesty's 

 Government, the following additional article: 



It shall be tompt^teiit to the Arbitrntors to iiward such conipeusation as, iu tlicir 

 Juclgmeiit, shall seem equitable to the subjects and citizeus of eitlicr power who sliall 

 Ijc sliown to have beeu dauinifieil iu the pursuit of the industry of sealing by the 

 action of the other power. 



The President can not give his assent to this form of submitting the 

 question of compensation. It entirely omits notice of the important 

 fact that the Government of the United States, as the owners of the 

 seal fisheries on the Pribilof Islands, has interests which have been 

 injuriously affected by the pelagic sealing, of which complaint has been 

 made in this correspondence. 



This Government has derived a very large annual income from this 

 l)roperty, and that income has, in the opinion of the President, been 

 very seriously impaired and imperiled by the destruction of the seal in 

 the sea while passing to and from the breeding grounds on these 

 islands. The Government of Her Majesty has directly interposed to 

 support the Canadian sealers, and will not, the President assumes, 

 desire to avoid responsibility for iiny damages which have resulted to 

 the United States or to its citizens, if it shall be found by the Arbitra- 

 tors that the pursuit of seals by these Canadian vessels in the sea was 

 an infraction of the rights and an injury to the property of this Gov- 

 ernment. The proposal submitted by you distinctly limits the liability 

 of Her Majesty's Government, in case of a decision in favor of the 

 United States, to compensation to the citizens of this country. It will 

 be apparent to Lord Salisbury that whatever damages have resulted 

 from pelagic sealing as pursued by vessels flying the British flag have 

 accrued to the United States or to its lessees. The President does not 

 doubt that the purpose of Her Majesty's Government, in the proposal 

 under discussion, was to secure the party injured equitable compensa- 

 tion for injuries resulting from what may be found by the Arbitrators 

 to have been the unlawful and injurioiis act of either Government. 



From the note of Lord Salisbury of February 21, to which reference 

 has been made, I quote the folloM'ing: 



Tliere is one omission in these questions which I have no doubt theGoveinmcut of 

 the President will be very glad to repair, and that is the reference to the Arbitratiu' 

 of ll)e question, what damages are due to the pers<ius who have been injured, in case 

 it shall be determined by him that the action of the United States iu seizing British 

 vessels has been without warrant iu international law. 



I am directed by the President to propose the following seventh and 

 final clause in the basis of arbitraHou: 



(7) It shall be couipetent to tiie Arbitrators to award such compensa- 

 tion as, in their judgment, shall seem equitable to the subjects or citi- 

 zens of Great Britain whose vessels may have been seized by the United 

 States in the Behring Sea, if such seizures shall be tound by the Arbitra- 

 tors to have been unwarranted; audit shall also be competent to the 

 Arbitrators to award to the United States such compensation as, in 

 their judgmeut, shall seem equitable for auy injuries resulting to the 



