- a eee ee 
APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 527 
Regulations which would be adequate for the purpose.” Further interviews were 
held during the following month of February (1888) between Lord Salisbury and the 
American Minister, and between Lord Salisbury and the American Minister, accom- 
panied by ‘the Russian Ambassador. In answer to Lord Salisbury’s request, Mr. 
Phelps submitted the ‘‘Regulations” which the Government of the United States 
desired; and in a despatch of the 25th February Mr. Phelps communicated the fol- 
lowing to Mr. Bayard, Secretary of State: 
“Lord Salisbury assents to your proposition to establish, by mutual arrangement 
between the Governments interested, a close time for fur-seals, between the 15th 
April and the 1st November and between 160° of longitude west and 170° of longi- 
tude east, in the Behring’s Sea. And he will cause an Act to be introduced into 
Parliament to give effect to this arrangement so soon as it can be prepared. In his 
opinion, there is no doubt that the Act will be passed. 
‘‘He will also join the United States Government in any preventive measures it 
may be thought best to adopt, by orders issued to the naval vessels of the respective 
Governments in that region.” 
Early in April (1888) the Russian Ambassador in London, M. de Staal, advised the 
American Chargé ‘‘that the Russian Government would like to have the Regulations 
which might be agreed upon for the Behring’s Sea extended to that portion of the 
latter in which the Commander Islands are situated, and also to the Sea of Okhotsk, 
in which Robben Island is situated.” On the 16th April, at Lord Salisbury’s invita- 
tion, the Russian Ambassador and Mr. White (the American Chargé), Mr. Phelps 
being absent from London, met at the Foreign Office ‘for the purpose of discussing 
with Lord Salisbury the details of the proposed Conventional arrangement for the 
protection of seals in Behring’s Sea.” 
* * * * * * * 
476 “‘With a view to meeting the Russian Government’s wishes respecting the 
waters surrounding Robben Island, his Lordship suggested that beside the 
whole of Behring’s Sea, those portions of the Seaof Okhotsk and of the Pacific Ocean 
north of north latitude 47° should be included in the proposed arrangement. His 
Lordship intimated, furthermore, that the period proposed by the United States for a 
closed time, from the 15th April to the Ist November, might interfere with the trade 
longer than absolutely necessary for the protection of seals, and he suggested the Ist 
October, instead of a month later, as the termination of the period of seal protec- 
‘tion.” Furthermore, Lord Salisbury ‘‘promised to have a draft Convention prepared 
for submission to the Russian Ambassador and American Minister.” 
On the 23rd April, the American Chargé was informed by Lord Salisbury that ‘it 
is now proposed to give effect to a Seal Convention by Order in Council, not by Act 
of Parliament.” It was understood that this course was proposed by Lord Salisbury 
in order that the ‘‘Regulations” needed in Behring’s Sea might be promptly applied. 
You will observe, then, that from the 11th November, 1887, to the 23rd April, 1888, 
Lord Salisbury had in every form of speech assented to the necessity of a close season 
for the protection of the seals. 
The shortest period which he named was from the 15th April to the 1st October— 
five and a-half months. In addition, his Lordship suggested that the closed sea for 
the period named should include the whole of the Behring’s Sea, and should also 
include such portion of the Sea of Okhotsk as would be necessary to protect the 
Russian seal fishery on Robben Island; that the closed season be extended as far 
south as 47° north latitude, 120 miles south of the northern boundary of the United 
States on the Pacific Ocean. He promised, further, to draft a Convention upon the 
subject between England, Russia, and the United States. 
These assurances were given to the American Minister, to the American Chargé 
to the Russian Ambassador, and on more than one occasion to two of them together. 
The United States had no reason, therefore, to doubt that the whole dispute touch- 
ing the seal fisheries was practically settled. Indeed, to have distrusted it would 
have been to question the good faith of Lord Salisbury. In diplomatic intercourse 
between Great Britain and the United States, be it said to the honour of both Gov- 
ernments, a verbal assurance from a Minister has always been equal to his written 
pledge. Speaking the same language, there has been no room for misunderstanding 
between the Representatives of the two Governments, as may easily happen between 
those of different tongues. Fora period of six months, therefore, without retraction 
or qualification, without the suggestion of a doubt or the dropping of a hint, the 
understanding between the two Governments, on the assurance of Lord Salisbury, 
was as complete as language could make it. 
On the 28th April, five days after Lord Salisbury’s last pointed assurance, five days 
after he had proposed to perfect the scheme, not by the delay of Parliament, but by 
the promptness of an Order in Council, the American Chargé was informed that the 
Act of Parliament would be necessary in addition to the Order in Council, and that 
neither Act nor Order could be drafted ‘until Canada is heard from,” 
