APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 326 
steps should be taken to proceed at once with the appeals to the 
Supreme Court of the United States in the cases of the British vessels 
whose sealing operations were stopped under similar circumstances in 
1886. 
I am to request, therefore, that you will suggest, for Lord Knutsford’s 
consideration, that a telegram should be sent to the Governor-General 
of Canada to the effect that, it being very unusual to press for diplo- 
matic redress for a private wrong, So long as there is areasonable chance 
of obtaining it from the Tribunals of the country under whose jurisdic- 
tion the wrong complained of has occurred, Her Majesty’s Government 
consider that they would be in a stronger position for dealing diplo- 
matically with the Behring’s Sea cases if appeals on the cases of seizure 
which took place in 1886 were pushed on. 
Iam, &e. 
(Signed) T., H. SANDERSON. 
No, 209. 
Mr. Edwardes to the Marquis of Salisbury.—( Received August 19.) 
WASHINGTON, August 5, 1889. 
My Lorp: On the 1st instant I had the honour to inform your Lord- 
ship by telegraph that the newspapers reported the seizure on the 11th 
ultimo by the United States Revenue cruizer ‘‘Rush” of the British 
schooner ‘ Black Diamond,” sealing in Behring’s Sea, being at the time 
of the seizure 70 miles from land. 
It was also reported that another British schooner, the “Triumph,” 
was also boarded by the Captain of the “ Rush,” but no arrest was made, 
the seal-skins on board the “Triumph” having been captured in the 
Pacific, and not in the Behring’s Sea. 
I have not up to the present date received any official information on 
the subject. There is, however, no doubt about the truth of the fact 
that the seizure of a British vessel has been made, and that another 
British vessel was stopped and searched, both occurrences taking place 
on the high seas, on the grounds that they had no legal rights to seal- 
fish in those seas. 
The question of the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States over 
the Behring’s Sea is thus reopened, but it does not appear that any new 
feature in the case has presented itself. However, a novel situation is 
produced by the fact which is reported, that, after the seizure of the 
‘Black Diamond,” one of the crew of the United States cruizer having 
been placed on board of her by the Captain of the “‘ Rush,” with orders 
to take her to Sitka, the Captain of the British vessel ignored the 
instructions of the man in whose charge she was supposed to be, and 
sailed for Victoria, British Columbia, where she is reported to have 
arrived safely. Had she gone to Sitka, she would, in all probability, 
have been declared by the United States District Court of Alaska a 
lawful prize. As your Lordship will remember in the ease of the 
295 ‘British sealers which were seized during the last two years, and 
after seizure were condemned by the United States District Court 
of Alaska, the United States Goveriument agreed to release them on 
their owners giving bond to appeal to a higher Court. Few, if any of 
them, availed themselves of this permission, and they were ultimately 
sold by publicauction. I have been given reason to believe by a lawyer 
