APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN, 593 
{Inclosure 1 in No. 2.] 
Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. 
WASHINGTON, June 30, 1890. 
Str: In your note of the 29th May last,* which I duly transmitted to the Marquis 
of Salisbury, there are several references to communications which passed between 
the two Governments in the time of your predecessor. 
I have now received a despatch from Lord Salisbury, * copy of which I have the 
honour to inclose, pointing out that there is some error in the impressions which you 
have gathered from the records in the State Department with respect to those 
communications, 
I have, &c. 
(Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 
3 {Inclosure 2 in No. 2.] 
Sir J. Pauncefote to Mr. Blaine. 
WASHINGTON, June 80, 1890. 
Str: I have received a despatch from the Marquis of Salisbury, with reference to 
the passage in your note to me of the 4th instant, in which you remark that in 1888 
his Lordship abruptly closed the negotiations because “the Canadian Government 
objected,” and that he ‘assigned no _ other reason whatever.” 
In view of the observations contained in Lord Salisbury’s despatch of the 20th 
June, of which a copy is inclosed in my last preceeding note of this date, his Lord- 
ship deems it unnecessary to discuss at any greater length the circumstances which 
led to an interruption of the negotiations of 1888. 
With regard, however, to the passage of your note of the 4th instant above referred 
to, his Lor rdship wishes me to call your attention to the following statement made to 
him by Mr. Phelps, the United States Minister in London, on the 3rd April, 1888, 
and which was recorded in a despatch of the same date to Her Majesty’s Minister at 
Washington: 
‘Under the peculiar political circumstances of America at this moment,” said Mr. 
Phelps, ‘‘with a general election impending, it would be of little use, and, indeed, 
hardly practicable, to conduct any negotiation to its issue before the election had 
taken place.” 
1 have, &c. 
(Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 
{Inclosure 3 in No. 2.] 
Mr. Blaine to Sir J. Pauncefote. 
Bar HARBOUR, MAINE, July 19, 1890. 
Sir: Iregret that circumstances beyond my control have postponed my reply to 
your two notes of the 30th June, which were received on the Ist instant, on the eve 
of my leaving Washington for this place. The note which came to hand on the fore- 
noon of that day inclosed a despatch from Lord Salisbury, in which his Lordship, 
referring to my note of the 29th May, expresses “‘a wish to point out some errors” 
which he thinks I ‘‘had gathered from the records in my Office.” 
The purpose of Lord Salisbury is to show that I misapprehended the facts of the 
case when I represented him, in my note of the 29th May, as having given such 
“‘verbal assurances” to Mr. Phelps as warranted the latter in expecting a Convention 
to be concluded between the two Governments for the protection of the seal fisheries 
in Behring’s Sea. 
Speaking directly to this point, his Lordship says: ‘‘Mr. Blaine is under a mis- 
conception in imagining that I ever gave any verbal assurance or any promise of any 
kind with respect to the terms of the proposed Convention.” 
In answer to this statement, I beg you will say to Lord Salisbury that I simply 
quoted in my note of the 29th May the facts communicated by our Minister, Mr. 
Phelps, and our Chargé d’Affaires, Mr. White, who are responsible for the official 
*Tbid., p. 475. 
BS, PT V——38 
