APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. a0 
of State, referring to my notes of the 27th September, 21st October, 
and 7th December last, and to your Lordship’s despatch of the 30th 
October, copy of which I placed in his hand on the 12th November, and 
expressing the sense in which Her Majesty’s Government viewed his 
silence with regard to the communications which had been made to 
him respecting the seizure of British vessels in Behring’s Sea. 
1 have, Xe. 
(Signed) L. 8S. SACKVILLE WEST. 
[Inclosure in No. 24.] 
Sir L. West to Mr. Bayard. 
WASHINGTON, January 9, 1887. 
Srr: Ihave the honour to inform you that I have received instructions from the 
farl of Iddesleigh, Her Majesty’s Principal Secretary of State for Foreign 
38 Affairs, again to bring to your notice the grave representations made by Her 
Majesty’s Government respecting the seizure of the British vessels ‘‘ Carolina,” 
“Onward,” and ‘* Thornton” in Behring’s Sea, by the United States cruizer ‘‘Cor- 
win,” to which noreply has as yet been returned. 
On the 27th September last I had the honour to address to you a note in which 
T stated that Her Majesty’s Government requested to be furnished with any particu- 
lars which the United States Government might possess relative to this occurrence. 
On the 21st October last I had the honour to inform you that I was instructed by 
the Earl of Iddesleigh to protest, in the name of Her Majesty’s Government, against 
such seizures, and to reserve all rights to compensation. 
In a note dated the 12th November last you were good enough to explain the delay 
which had occurred in answering these communications, and, on the same day, I 
had the honour to communicate to you a despatch from the Earl of Iddesleigh, a 
copy of which, at your request, I placed in your hands. 
On the 7th ultimo I again had the honour to address you, stating that vessels were 
equipping in British Columbia for fishing in Behring’s Sea, and that the Canadian 
Government were desirous of ascertaining whether such vessels fishing in the open 
sea, and beyond the territorial waters of Alaska, would be exposed to seizure, and 
that Her Majesty’s Government would be glad if some assurance could be given that, 
pending the settlement of the questions, no such seizures of British vessels would 
be made in Behring’s Sea. 
The vessels in question were seized at a distance of more than 60 miles from the 
nearest land at the time of their seizure. The master of the ‘‘ Thornton” was sen- 
tenced to imprisonment for thirty days, and to pay a fine of 500 dollars, and there is 
reason to believe that the masters of the ‘‘Onward” and ‘‘Carolina” have been 
sentenced to similar penalties. 
In support of this claim to jurisdiction over a stretch of sea extending in its widest 
part some 600 or 700 miles from the mainland, advanced by the Judge i in his charge 
to the jury, the authorities are alleged to have interfered with the peaceable and 
lawful occupation of Canadian citizens on the high seas, to have takeu possession of 
their ships, to have subjected their property to forfeiture, and to have visited upon 
their persons the indignity of imprisonment. Such proceedings therefore, if cor- 
rectly reported, would appear to have been in violation of the admitted principle of 
international law. Under these circumstances, Her Majesty’s Government do not 
hesitate to express their concern at not having received any reply to their represen- 
tations, nor do they wish to conceal the grave nature which the casehas thus assu med, 
and to which I am now instructed to call your immediate and most serious attefition. 
It is unnecessary for me to allude further to the information with which Her 
Majesty’s Government has been furnished respecting these seizures of British ves- 
sels in the open seas, and which, for some time past, has been in the possession of 
the United States Government, because Her Majesty’s Government do not doubt 
that if, on inquiry, it should prove to be correct, the Government of the United 
States will, with their well-known sense of justice, admit the illegality of the pro- 
ceedings resorted to against the British vessels and the British subjects above men- 
tioned, and will cause ‘reasonable reparation to be made for the wrongs to which they 
have been subjected, and for the losses which they have sustained. 
In conclusion, I have the honour again to refer to your note of the 12th November 
last, and to what you said verbally to me on the same day, and to express the hope 
that the cause of the delay complained of in answering the 1 representations of Her 
Majesty’s Government on this grave and important matter may be speedily removed. 
I have, &c. (Signed) L. 8. SACKVILLE WEST. 
