ALASKA INDUSTRIES. 381 



case of the British sealing schooner Beatrice, of Vancouver, seized by the United 

 States revenue cutter Rush on August 20, 1895, for violation of the regulations of the 

 Paris award and the Bering Sea award act of 1894. 



I have not failed to bring this matter to the notice of Her Majesty's principal 

 secretary of state for foreign affairs. 

 I have the honor, etc., 



JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 

 Hon. RICHARD OLNEY. 



WASHINGTON, June 9, 1896. 



SIR: With reference to my note of the 7th April last and to previous correspond- 

 ence in regard to the case of the British sealing schooner Beatrice, I have the honor 

 to inform you that I am in receipt of a dispatch from Her Majesty's secretary of 

 state for foreigu affairs, stating that he has considered, in communication with the 

 secretary of state for the colonies, the request contained in your note to me, No. 361, 

 of 3d April, that an appeal should be taken from the decision of the British Colum- 

 bian court. 



The Marquess of Salisbury observes that it will be seen, on referring to the text of 

 the judgment, that the court distinctly stated that the delay in posting up the log 

 was not unreasonable in the circumstances, and further implied that even if the 

 proceedings had been taken against the master for a personal penalty under the 

 merchant shipping act, a conviction would not have been obtained. 



The legal point raised in the judgment is, however, a novel one, and it may be 

 desirable to obtain a definite decision from a higher court as to whether the penalty 

 for infringing the regulation requiring the entry in the official log book of particu- 

 lars of every seal-fishing operation is determined by section 1 (2) of the Bering Sea 

 award act, 1894, or by the provisions of the merchant shipping act as to the keeping 

 of logs. 



The intention of section 1 (3) of the Bering Sea award act would seem to have 

 been to compel the keeping of logs by small seal- fishing vessels which are not 

 required by the merchant shipping act to do so, rather than to define the penalty for 

 breach of the award regulation, which prescribes special log entries; and it would 

 seem to have been contemplated that the vessel should be liable for any breach of 

 these regulations. 



But the decision as regards the case of the Beatrice appears to Her Majesty's Gov- 

 ern ment to have been substantially in accordance with justice, and if an appeal is 

 to be taken in order to settle the above point it would not, in their opinion, be fair to 

 throw upon the owners of the vessel the trouble and cost of defending the appeal. 



I am instructed by the Marquess of Salisbury to state to you that for the reasons 

 briefly indicated above, Her Majesty's Government do not consider that they would 

 be justified in proceeding with an appeal unless the United States Government are 

 prepared to bear the cost of pursuing it and to satisfy any damages which the court 

 of appeal may award. 

 I have, etc., 



JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 



Hon. RICHARD OLNEY. 



DEPARTMENT OF STATE, Washington, June 18, 1896. 



EXCELLENCY: With reference to my note to you of the 1st of October last, in rela- 

 tion to the seizure of the British sealing schooner Beatrice, and to the subsequent 

 correspondence concerning the subject, I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt 

 of your note of the 9th instant, in regard to the question as to an appeal of the case, 

 and to inform you that the matter is receiving consideration. 

 I have the honor, etc., 



RICHARD OLNEY. 

 His Excellency Sir JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE, G. C. B., G. C. M. G. 



JUNE 15, 1896. 



SIR: I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letter of June 12, inclos- 

 ing a copy of a note of the 9th instant from the British ambassador 

 with relation to your request that the decision of the court in the case 

 of the British sealing schooner Beatrice be appealed from. In said 

 letter the British ambassador states that Her Majesty's Government 



