COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 139 



That the adhesion of other Powers has been regarded by 

 Great Britain and the United States of America respec- 

 tively as important, is shown by the conchiding words 

 of the Vllth Article of the Convention, in which "The 

 High Contracting Parties fnrthermore agree to co-operate 

 in securing the adhesion of other Powers to such Eeg- 

 ulations." 



No other Power has so far expressed its willingness to be 

 party to any scheme of Regulations such as the Arbitrators 

 might determine to be right and proper; and it is apparent 

 that to issue and to enforce concurrent Kegulations outside 

 the jurisdictional limits of Great Britain and the United 

 States of America, which would become binding upon their 

 respective nationals and upon them only, would tend to pre- 

 vent rather than to promote the adhesion of other Powers 

 in the future. 



It is submitted that, if any Eegulations are to be pre- 

 scribed, they ought to be so framed as ouly to come into 

 operation through the instrumentality of a Convention, at 

 which all the Powers interested shall be represented, and 

 at which proper provisions for their enforcement binding 

 on the nationals of all such Powers shall be formu- 

 162 lated, or that they should be conditional upon the 

 adhesion of such other Powers. 



It is further submitted that, in view of the great interna- 

 tional interests involved, it is fitting that the United States 

 of America should express their willingness to frame proper 

 and just concurrent Kegulations applicable to the islands 

 and their territorial waters. 



The. position here taken on the part of Great Britain is British case, 

 that already taken in the original Case. It is there stated : ^' 



Fiually, that while Great Britain has from the first strenuously and 

 consistently opposed all the foregoinj^ exceptional pretensions and 

 claims, she has throughout been favourably disposed to the adoption 

 of general measures of control of the fur-seal fishery, should these be 

 found to be necessary or desirable with a view to the protection of the 

 fur-seals, provided that such measures be equitable and framed on just 

 grounds of common interest, and tluU the adhesion of other Powers be 

 secured as a guarantee of their continued and impartial execution. 



For the correspondence on this point, the Arbitrators are J^^n^t*"'! states, 

 respectfully referred to the Appendix to the United States voM.^^'isg-'iw. 

 Case. 



A claim is made in the concluding words of the United united states 

 States Case that such Regulations be — ^^^^' ?• 2°^- 



prescribed by this high Tribunal, as will effectually prohibit and pre- 

 vent the capture anywhere upon the high seas of any seals belonging 

 to the said herd. 



Her Majesty's Government respectfully protest that no 

 power to impose on the Contracting Parties a total prohi- 

 bition of pelagic sealing is conferred on the Tribunal by the 

 Arbitration Treaty, whether the assent of other nations be 

 or be not made a condition of such prohibition. 



Article V"II empowers the Arbitrators to — 



determine what concurrent Regulations outside the jurisdictional 

 limits of the respective (ioverL.meuts are necessary^ and over what 

 waters such Regulations should extend. 



