332 DIPLOMATIC COKRESPONDENCE. 



clause last proposed by him can be lield to imply an admission on tlio 

 part ofOrcat Britain "of a doctrine respecting' tlie liability of Govern- 

 uicnts for the acts of their nationals or otlser persons sailing under their 

 tiag- on the high seas, which is not warranted by international law." 

 The proposition was expressly framed so as to submit to the Arbitrators 

 the question of the liability of Great Britain for the acts of vessels sail- 

 ing under its flag. It did not assume a liability, but was framed ex- 

 pressly to avoid this objection, which had been urged against the 

 I)revious proposal. I quote from my note of July 23 : 



The United States might well insist that Her Majesty's Government should admit 

 resj)ousibility for the acts of the Canadian scalers, wliich it lias so directly eucour- 

 aged and promoted, precisely as in the proposal the United States admits respon- 

 6i1>iiity for the acts of the revenue vessels. Bat, with a view to remove what seems 

 to he "tlie last point of difference iu a discussion which has been very much pro- 

 tracted, the President is willing to modif^^ his proposal and directs me to offer the 

 following: 



The claim of the United States was stated in my note of July 23, ac- 

 companying the proposal, and the President does not see how the claims 

 of the respective Governments could be more fairly or fidly submitted. 

 This Government proposes to submit to the Arbitrators the question 

 whether Great Britain is liable for the injury done to the seal tisheries, 

 the property of the United States, by the Canadian vessels that have, 

 under the stimulation and supx)ort of the British Government, been for 

 several years engaged in the Behring Sea. The proposal of this Govern 

 ment was that the Arbitrators should consider and decide such claims 

 in accordance with justice and equity and the respective rights of the 

 high contracting parties. 



The President is unable to accept the last suggestion Mdiich you make 

 in your note, as it seems to him to be entirely ineffectual. The facts 

 connected with the seizure of Canadian sealers by the revenue vessels 

 of the United States, on the one hand, and v/itli the invasion of the sea 

 and the taking of seals by the Canadian sealers on the other, are well 

 known, and doubtless could be agreed upon by the respective Govern- 

 ments without difticulty. It is over the question of liability to respond 

 in damages for these acts that the controversy exists, and the President 

 can see no other course for this Government than to insist u])on the 

 submission of the question of the liability of Great Britain for the acts 

 it com])lains of to Arbitrators. This Government does not insist that 

 Great Britain shall admit any liability for the acts complained of, but 

 it may well insist, if this Arbitration is to residt in any effectual settle- 

 ment of the diflerences between tlie two Governments, that the question 

 of Great Britain's liability shall goto the Arbitrators for decision. 



If you have any suggestions to make in support of the objection that 

 the proposal made by the President assumes a liability on the part of 

 Great Britain, the President will be very glad to receive them, and, if 

 necessary, to reconsider the phraseology; but, upon a careful and crit- 

 ical examination of the i^roposition, he is unable to see that the objection 

 now made has any sup^Dort in the terms of the proposal. 

 1 am, etc., 



William F. Wharton, 



Acting Secretary. 



