APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 543 
when I was describing the somewhat complicated arrangements by 
which Agreements of this kind are brought into force in England. But 
two or three days after the 23rd April he called to make inquiry on the 
subject, and, in reply to his question, the following letter was addressed 
to him by my instructions: 
FOREIGN OFFicE, April 27, 1888. 
My Drar WuiteE: Lord Salisbury desires me to express his regret that he is not 
yet in a position to make any further communication to you on the subject of the 
seal fisheries in Behring’s Sea. After his interview with you and M. de Staal he had 
to refer to the Canadian Government, the Board of Trade, and the Admiralty, but 
has as yet only obtained the opinion of the Admiralty. The next step is to bring a 
Bill into Parliament. 
Yours, &c. 
(Signed) Eric BARRINGTON. 
On the 28th Mr. White replied: 
LEGATION OF THE UNITED STATEs, 
London, April 28, 1888. 
My Dear BARRINGTON: Thanks for your note, respecting the final sentence of 
which, ‘‘ The next step is to bring a Bill into Parliament,” I must trouble you with 
a line. 
I understood Lord Salisbury to say when I saw him with M.de Staal, and again 
last week alone, that it is now proposed to give effect to the Conventional arrange- 
ment for the protection of seals by an Order in Council, not by Act of Parliament. 
When Mr. Phelps left, the latter was thought necessary, and last week I received a 
telegram from the Secretary of State, asking me obtain confidentially a copy of the 
proposed Act of Parliament, with a view to assimilating our contemplated Act of 
Congress thereto. I replied, after seeing Lord Salisbury last Saturday, that there 
would be no Bill introduced in Parliament, bat an Order in Council. 
May I ask if this be now incorrect, as, in that event, I should particularly like to 
correct my former statement by this day’s mail. 
To this the following reply was on the same date addressed to Mr. 
White: 
: FOREIGN OFFICE, April 28, 1888. 
My Dear Waite: Lord Salisbury is afraid that he did not make himself under- 
stood when last he spoke to you about the Seal Fisheries Convention. 
An Act of Parliament is necessary to give power to our authorities to act on the 
provisions of the Convention when itis signed. The Order in Council will be merely 
he machinery which the Act will provide for the purpose of bringing its provisions 
into force. The object of this machinery is to enable the Government to wait till 
the other two Powers are ready. But neither Convention nor Bill is drafted yet, 
because we have not got the opinions from Canada which are necessary to enable us 
to proceed. 
Yours, &e. 
(Signed) Eric BARRINGTON. 
It is evident from this correspondence that if the United States 
Government was misled upon the 25rd April into the belief that Her 
Majesty’s Government could proceed in the matter without an 
492. Actof Parliament, or could proceed without previous reference 
to Canada, it was a mistake which must have been entirely dissi- 
pated by the correspondence which followed in the ensuing week. 
Mr. Blaine is also under a misconception in imagining that I ever 
gave any verbal assurance, or any promise of any kind, with respect 
to the terms of the projected Convention. Her Majesty’s Government 
always have been, and are still, anxious for the arrangement of a Con- 
vention which shall provide whatever close time in whatever localities 
is necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species. But I have 
always represented that the details must be the subject of discussion, 
a discussion to which those who are locally interested must of necessity 
contribute, I find the record of the following conversation about the 
date to which Mr. Blaine refers: 
