ARGUMENT OF CHARLES B. WARREN. 1123 



" 2. How far were these claims of jurisdiction as to the seal fish- 

 eries recognized and conceded by Great Britain? 



******* 



" 4. Did not all the rights of Russia as to jurisdiction and as to 

 the seal fisheries in Behring's Sea east of the water boundary, in the 

 Treaty between the United States and Russia of the 30th March, 

 1867, pass unimpaired to the United States under that Treaty? 



" 5. Has the United States any right, and if so, what right of pro- 

 tection or property in the fur seals frequenting the islands of the 

 United States in Behring Sea when such seals are found outside the 

 ordinary three-mile limit? " 



These questions are in the Convention between the two Powers 

 submitting this matter to arbitration. 



These questions it is obvious were agreed upon after the United 

 States had emphatically repudiated any claim on its part that it 

 sought to make the eastern portion of Behring Sea territorial waters, 

 and after Lord Salisbury had stated that he understood no such 

 claim to be made. 



In the Printed Argument filed on behalf of the United States in 

 that Arbitration, when considering the questions before the Tribunal, 

 this statement, found in vol. IX, on p. 37 of the American reprint 

 of the Fur Seal Arbitration, was made : 



" The words ' exclusive jurisdiction in Behring Sea ' .are used in 

 the questions formulated in the Treaty by way of description of the 

 claims of Russia, and the same, or similar, language will be found in 

 various places in the diplomatic argument to have been employed in 

 a like sense. From this it might be thought that what Russia was 

 supposed to have asserted, and what the United States claimed as a 

 right derived from her, was a sovereign jurisdiction over some part 

 of Behring Sea, making it a part of their territory and subject to 

 their laws. This would be entirely erroneous. Russia never put for- 

 ward any such pretension." 



The Argument then goes on to state that Russia sought to prevent 

 interference with her commercial enterprises on the north-west coast 

 of America by the adoption of measures similar to the Hovering Acts 

 of various countries; and at p. 38 of the same volume appears this 

 statement : 



" This, of course, was no assertion of exclusive jurisdiction, or of 

 jurisdiction at all, in the strict sense of that term. It was the asser- 

 tion of a right to protect interests attached to the shore from threats 

 and danger of invasion." 



In his oral argument Mr. James C. Carter, Counsel for the United 



States, submitted to the Tribunal a written statement setting forth 



the position of the United States as to the principles involved in its 



contention ; the first two paragraphs relate to territorial jurisdiction. 



I read from p. 254 of vol. XII of the Fur Seal Proceedings : 



677 " First. The territory of a nation consists of the land within 

 its dominion and what are commonly called its territorial 



