THE FUR-SEALS AND THE BERING SEA AWARD 17 



before the District Court of Alaska, their masters found guilty, 

 and the vessels were accordingly confiscated and condemned 

 to be sold. In the trial of these vessels their owners advanced 

 the following argument in defence of their rights: 



The first question then to be decided is what is meant by the 

 " waters thereof." If the defendants are bound by the treaty between 

 the United States and Russia ceding Alaska to the United States, 

 then it appears that Eussia in 1822 claimed absolute territorial 

 sovereignty over the Behring Sea, and purported to convey practi- 

 cally one-half of that sea to the United States. But are the defend- 

 ants, as men belonging to a country on friendly terms with the 

 United States, bound by this assertion of Russia ? And can the 

 United States claim that the treaty conveys to them any greater 

 right than Russia herself possessed in these waters ? In other 

 words, the mere assertion of a right contrary to the comity of 

 nations can confer on the grantees no rights in excess of those 

 recognized by the laws of nations. 



It also appears that the United States in claiming sovereignty 

 over the Behring Sea is claiming something beyond the well-recog- 

 nized law of nations, and bases her claim upon the pretensions of 

 Russia, which were successfully repudiated by both Great Britain 

 and the United States. A treaty is valid and binding between 

 the parties to it, but it cannot affect others who are not parties to 

 it. It is an agreement between nations, and would be construed 

 in law like an agreement between individuals. Great Britain was 

 no party to it and therefore is not bound by its terms. 



The American position, on the other hand, may well be 

 presented in the following words taken from the charge to 

 the jury, made by Judge Dawson of the District Court of 

 Alaska in the libel proceeding against these vessels : 



All the waters within the boundary set forth in this treaty to 

 the western end of the Aleutian archipelago and chain of islands 

 are to be considered as comprised within the waters of Alaska, 

 and all the penalties prescribed by law against the killing of fur- 

 bearing animals must, therefore, attach against any violation of 

 law within the limits heretofore described. 



If, therefore, the jury believe from the evidence that the defend- 

 ants by themselves or in conjunction with others did, on or about 

 the time charged in the information, kill any otter, mink, marten, 

 sable, or fur-seal, or other fur-bearing animal or animals, on the 

 c 



