ALASKA INDUSTRIES. 353 



whether I see any objection to the United States acceding to such an 

 arrangement. 



I have carefully examined the inclosed draft, and while I find certain 

 portions not perfectly clear I understand the proposals to be: 



First. That the prohibited zone around the Commander and Robben 

 islands shall be in the future GO miles instead of 30, as now fixed by the 

 agreement of 1894. 



Second. That pelagic sealing shall be wholly prohibited from April 1 

 to October 15 in Bering Sea, the sea of Okhotsk, and the Pacific Ocean 

 north of the thirty fifth degree of north latitude, from the Asiatic to 

 the American shores. 



Third. That all existing articles of the arrangement of 1894 not hereby 

 abrogated shall remain in force. 



I perceive no objections to the first and second propositions. The 

 American herd is now protected under the regulations of the Paris 

 award during May, June, and July. On July 31, when the season ends, 

 the herd is in Bering Sea. The proposed arrangement providing for 

 closing Bering Sea to fur-seal fishing between April 1 and October 15 

 would satisfactorily protect our herd, as after October 15 no sealing 

 vessels could remain in Bering Sea on account of the inclemency of the 

 weather. 



Under the third suggestion, the prohibition of sealing to American 

 vessels within 10 miles of the Eussian Coast would still continue, as 

 would also the provision relating to the seizure of American vessels 

 found hunting fur seals within said prohibited area, outside of Territo- 

 rial waters, by Eussian naval officers, and for condemnation of such 

 vessels by the courts of the United States. I would suggest that in 

 order to bring the proposed arrangement into harmony with the terms 

 of the Paris award the provision as to the 10- mile limit be omitted, and 

 that there should be inserted in the draft a reciprocal provision that 

 Eussiau sealing vessels, if any, may be seized by American naval officers 

 and condemned by the Eussian courts for breach of the convention. 1 

 would further suggest that the Eussian Government should agree to 

 accept and be bound by all the provisions of the Paris award and the 

 legislation in respect thereto not abrogated by said proposed draft, 

 which should be stated to be not in derogation of the award of the Paris 

 tribunal, except where necessarily inconsistent therewith, but in addi- 

 tion thereto. 



I notice that no suggestion is made as to obtaining the concurrence 

 of the Japanese Government as to said proposed arrangement. Dur- 

 ing the past season five Japanese sealers were reported to have engaged 

 in fur-seal fishing, making a catch of 2, 960 seals. 1 have the honor to 

 suggest that it might be advisable to obtain the consent of Japan. The 

 principal injury suffered by the Eussian herd at the hands of pelagic 

 sealers is while the herd is off the shores of Japan, going north to the 

 Commander and Eobben islands. For example, in 1894 only a little 

 over 7,000 seals were killed at sea in Eussian waters, as compared with 

 over 71,000 taken off the coast of Japan. In 1895 about the same num- 

 ber were taken in Eussian waters, as compared with over 29,000 taken 

 off the coast of Japan ; and in the same year only six American vessels 

 report making catches in Eussian waters, to the total amount of 766 

 skins. In 1894 only 201 skins were reported taken by American pelagic 

 sealers. 



I take pleasure in inclosing a memorandum giving, on page 107, 

 information as to the catch of seals and other kindred subjects, which 

 H. Doc. 92, pt. 2 23 



