APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 817 
The President returned to Washington on the 23rd, and on the fol- 
lowing day I called on Mr. Wharton to urge the immediate resumption 
of the negotiations. He promised to see the President at once on the 
subject, and yesterday evening I received from him the official note 
of which I at once telegraphed the substance to your Lordship, and of 
which a copy is inclosed in my separate despatch No. 141 of this date. 
In that note Mr. Wharton submits, on behalf of the President, the 
text of two new clauses in the proposed Arbitration Convention with 
reference to the questions of an international close season, and of the 
claims for compensation, and also proposes a form of a separate and 
contemporaneous agreement for a Joint Commission. 
I have, &e. 
(Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 
No. 82. 
Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—(Received July 6.) 
WASHINGTON, June 26, 1891. 
My Lorp: With reference to my telegram of yesterday’s date, I 
have the honour to inclose herewith a copy of a note which I received 
yesterday evening from the Acting Secretary of State, in answer to 
the Memorandum (see my despatch of the 5th June) which I communi- 
cated to him on the 8rd instant in conformity with the instructions 
contained in your Lordship’s telegram of the 2nd instant, on the subject 
of the Behring’s Sea Arbitration. 
I have, “Sie. 
(Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 
61 [Inclosure in No. 82.] 
Mr. Wharton to Sir J. Pauncefote. 
WASHINGTON, June 25, 1891, 
Sir: The correspondence between this Government and that of Her Majesty has 
happily resulted in an Agreement upon the first five propositions which are to con- 
stitute the basis of a proposed Arbitration relating to the controversy which has 
arisen as to the respective rights of the two Governments in Behring’s Sea. 
In the note of Lord Salisbury of the 21st February last he states his objection to 
the sixth proposition, as presented in the letter of Mr. Blaine of the 17th December, 
1890, in the following words: 
“The sixth question, which deals with the issues that will arise in case the con- 
troversy should be decided in favour of Great Britain, would perhaps more fitly 
form the substance of a separate reference, Her Majesty’s Government have no 
objection to referring the general question of a closed time to arbitration, or to 
ascertain by that means how far the enactment of such a provision is necessary for 
the preservation of the seal species, but such reference ought not to contain w ords 
appearing to attribute special and abnormal right in the matter to the United States.” 
I am now directed by the President to submit the following, which he thinks 
avoids the objection urged by Lord Salisbury : 
“No. 6. If the determination of the foregoing questions as to the exclusive juris- 
diction of the United States shall leave the : subject in such position that the concur- 
rence of Great Britain is necessary to the establishment of Regulations for the 
proper protection and preservation of the fur-seal in, or habitually resorting to, the 
Behring’s Sea, the Arbitrators shall then determine what concurrent Regulations 
outside the jurisdictional limits of the respective Governinents are necessary, and 
ever what waters such Regulations should extend, and to aid them in that determi- 
BS, PTV 52 
