cr? 
APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 599 
graphed to his Government expressing his fear that, owing to the oppo- 
sition of Canada, there would be no Convention. 
The Presidential election then supervened, which, as Mr. Phelps 
admitted, necessarily suspended the negotiations. The formation of a 
new Cabinet at Washington, and the appointment of a new British 
Minister, retarded further progress, and it was not until the month of 
February last that it was agreed that the negotiation should be resumed. 
at Washington between Mr, Blaine (the new Secretary of State), M. de 
Struve (the Russian Minister), and myself. 
It was admitted that the sole object of the inquiry was the preserva- 
tion of the fur-seal species for the benefit of mankind, and that no con- 
sideration of advantage to any particular nation, or of benefit to any 
private interest, should enter into the discussion. 
During the negotiation I had the advantage of the able assistance 
of Mr. Charles Tupper, the Canadian Minister of Marine and Fisheries, 
and I may say that, throughout the inquiry, Her Majesty’s Government 
were animated by the largest spirit of justice, frendliness, and concilia- 
tion. 
On the part of the United States Government, Mr. Blaine produced 
a Memorandum of evidence and extracts from official documents to 
prove “that the killing of seals in the open sea tends certainly and 
rapidly to the extermination of the species. 
This assertion was combated with great force and ability by Mr. 
Tupper in a counter-Memorandum which I laid before the Conference, 
and in which a great amount of testimony is collated adverse to 
9 the view of the United States Government. The result of the 
careful consideration which I gave to the evidence on both sides 
was to satisfy my own mind that, while measures are called for to pro- 
tect female seals with young from slaughter during the well-known 
periods of their migration to and from the breeding islands, and also to 
prohibit the approach of sealing-vessels within a certain distance of 
those islands, the inquiry had failed to establish the contention of the 
United States Government that the absolute prohibition of pelagic 
sealing is necessary for the preservation of the fur-seal species. 
But the conflict of evidence and opinion on many points was such as 
to preclude all hope of a solution of the question without recourse to a 
Commission of Experts, and possibly to arbitration. 
In this state of things I was invited by Mr. Blaine to make a pro- 
posal on behalf of Her Majesty’s Government. Accordingly, I prepared 
and submitted to the Conference the scheme of settlement explained 
in my note to Mr. Blaine of the 29th April,* together with the draft of 
a Convention to carry it into effect, the draft having previously met 
with the concurrence of the Canadian Government and with your Lord- 
ship’s approval. 
I venture to think that it would be difficult to suggest a more equi- 
table basis of settlement. 
The proposed Convention provided for an appointment of a Mixed 
Commission of Experts to report on the disputed points, with ultimate 
recourse to arbitration, should it be found necessary for the final adjust- 
ment of all the questions involved. Moreover, it embodied regulations 
to take immediate effect, and which I do not hesitate to affirm were 
amply sufficient to remove all risk of the depletion, or even appreciable 
diminution, of the fishery pending the Report of the Commission. 
*See ‘‘ United States No. 2 (1890),” p. 455. 
