Biz APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 
[Inclosure in No. 114.—Extract.] 
The Marquis of Lansdowne to Lord Knutsford. 
GOVERNMENT HOoUuSsE, Ottawa, March 21, 1888. 
I am given to understand by my Minister of Marine and Fisheries that permission 
has actually been given to the owners of the British vesseis to bond them pending 
appeal, provided that the sureties are citizens of the United States and resident 
therein. He has, however, learnt that the British Columbian owners who are con- 
cerned in this matter are not willing to bond their vessels if they are thereby bound 
to carry an appeal to the United States Courts, and if, by not proceeding with the 
appeal, they would thereby forteit their bonds, : 
It has, moreover, been suggested that, by giving bonds pending an appeal to the 
Supreme Court of the United States, the owners might thereby place the matter 
outside the scope of any diplomatic negotiations which may take place upon this 
subject, a result which they would naturally be desirous of avoiding. 
They have now inquired whether it would be possible for them to bond their ves- 
sels, &c., pending, not an appeal to the Supreme Court, but the diplomatic settle- 
ment of the question which has arisen in connection with the seal fishery in these 
waters. 
I shall be glad if Her Majesty’s Government will invite the attention of that of 
the United States to this request, which should be attended to as soon as possible. 
From information which I have received, there is reason to believe that the seal- 
skins on board of these vessels will be sold at Sitka on the 19th April. 
In connection with the subject of this despatch, I venture again to call your atten- 
tion to the inquiry made in my telegram of the 31st March, 1887, in regard to the 
action likely to be taken during the present year by cruizers of the United States 
in Behring’s Sea against sealers frequenting these waters. The uncertainty as to 
this has had a very prejudicial effect upon the fishing interests of British Columbia, 
and I would urge that, both in order to avoid this inconvenience, and also in order 
to obviate the risk of further friction between the two Governments, an explicit 
statement of its intentions should be obtained from that of the United States with 
as little delay as possible. It is, I think, obvious that an international arrangement 
whereby a close time would be established for fur-seals within certain limits is not 
likely to be arrived at in time to provide for the requirements of the fishing season 
of this year. 
I have communicated a copy of this despatch to Sir Lionel West. 
Wil No. 116. 
Foreign Office to Colonial Office. 
FOREIGN OFFICE, April 14, 1888. 
Str: I laid before the Marquis of Salisbury your letter of the 10th 
instant, together with the despatch trom the Marquis of Lansdowne 
therein inclosed, respecting the bonding of British sealing-vessels cap- 
tured by the United States cruizers in Behring’s Sea during last sea- 
son, and- again urging the desirability of obtaining from the United 
States Government a distinct intimation of their intentions with regard 
to the approaching season. 
On this latter point my other letter of this day will have made known 
to the Secretary of State for the Colonies Lord Salisbury’s views. 
With regard to the question of “the bonding for appeal vessels or 
cargoes condemned to forfeiture by the District Court of Alaska,” lam 
directed by Lord Salisbury to observe that the arrangement proposed 
in paragraph 5 of Lord Lansdowne’s despatch would operate as an 
abandonment of the right of -appeal without any certain prospect of a 
remedy by diplomatic action. His Lordship would therefore suggest, 
for the consideration of Lord Knutsford, whether it might not be pref- 
erable to propose to the United States Government that the time lim- 
ited for the prosecution of the appeals should be extended by consent 
oe 
¥ 
: 
