APPENDIX TO COUNTER-CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 301 



2. How far were these claims of jurisdiction as to the seal fisheries recognized and 

 conceded by Great Britain? 



3. Was the body of water now known as the Behring Sea included in the phrase 

 "Pacific Ocean," as useil in the Treaty of 1825 between Great Britain and Russia, 

 and what rights, if any, in the Behring Sea, were held and exclusively exercised by 

 Russia after said Treaty? 



4. Did not all the rights of Rnssia as to jurisdiction, and as to the sealiisheries in 

 Behring Sea east of the water bouuiUiry 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 protection or prop- 

 erty in the fur-seals frequenting the islands of the United States in Behring Sea 

 when such seals are found outside the ordinary 3-inile limit? 



6. If the determination of the foregoing questions as to the exclusive jurisdiction 

 of the United States shall leave the subject in such position that the concurrence of 

 Great Britain is necessary to the establishment of Regulations for the projjer pro- 

 tection and preservation of the fur-seal in, or habitually resorting to, the Behring 

 Sen, the Arbitrators shall then determine what concurrent Regulations outside the 

 jurisdictional limits of the respective Governments are necessary, and over what 

 Witters such Regulations should extend, and to aid them in that determination the 

 Report of a Joint Commission to be appointed by the respective Governments shall be 

 laid before them, with such other evidence as either Government may submit. 



The Contracting Powers furthermore agree to co-operate in securing the adhe- 

 sion of other Powers to such Regulations. 



7. The respective Governments having found themselves unable to agree upon a 

 reference which shall include the question of the liability of each for the injuries 

 alleged to have been sustained by the other, or by its citizens, in connection with the 

 claims presented and urged by it, and being solicitous that this subordinate question 

 should not interrupt or longer delay the submission and determination of the main 

 questions, do agree that either may submit to the Arbitrators any question of fact 

 involved in said claims, and ask for a finding thereon, the question of the liability 

 of either Government upon the facts found to be the subject of further negotiation. 



(Signed) James G. Blaine. 



December 18, 1891. Julian Pauncefote. 



The following is the text of the Behring Sea Joint Commission Agreement as set- 

 tled in the di])lomatic correspondence between the Government of the United States 

 and the Government of Great Britain : 



Each Government shall appoint two Commissioners to investigate, conjointly with 

 the Commissioners of the other Government, all the facts having relation to seal life 

 in Behring Sea, and the measures necessary for its proper protection and j)reserva- 

 tion . 



The four Commissioners shall, so far as they may be able to agree, make a joint 

 Report to each of the two Governments; and they shall also report, either jointly 

 or severally, to each Government on any points upon which they may be unable to 

 agree. 



These Reports shall not be made public until they shall be submitted to the Arbi- 

 trators, or it shall appear that the contingency of their being used by the Arbiti a- 

 tors cannot arise. 



(Signed) .James G. Blaine. 



December 18, 1891. 



Julian Pauncefote. 



10 [Inclosure 4 in No. 3.] 



Memoranduvi handed to Mr. Herbert by Mr. Foster, November 9, 1892. 



Mr. Foster suggests that the time fixed in the Treaty for presentation of the 

 printed Argument is inadequate, especially in view of the fact that the Counsel of the 

 United States will have to consume a considerable part of that time in crossing the 

 ocean after receipt of the Counter-Case and preparation of the Argument. It has 

 been contemplated after the Argument was completed to translate the same into 

 French. It is manifest that all this cannot be properly accomplished within thirty 

 days. Having in mind the offer made in Lord Rosebery's note of the 13th October of i. 

 further extension of time, if desired by the United States, in view of the late date at 

 which the Report of the British Commissioners was delivered, Mr. Foster proposes 

 that it be agreed between the two Governments that, on the meeting of the Tribunal 

 of Arbitration, if the Agent of either Government shall ask the Arbitrators for an 

 adjournment of not exceeding thirty days to enable the printed Argumeut to be filed, 

 the Agent of the other Government will also supi^ort the request. 



