904 APPENDIX TO CASE OF GREAT BRITAIN. 
Sea Arbitration Agreement, as stated in my note of the 23rd ultimo, and I have now 
the honour to inform you that I have received a reply from his Lordship to the 
following effect. 
As regards the first reservation, Lord Salisbury observes that the statement con- 
tained in your note, that the clause leaves the Arbitrators free to decide whether 
Regulations are needed or not, assures the same end as the proposed reservation, 
which therefore becomes unnecessary, and may be put aside. 
With respect to the second reservation, his Lordship states that it was not the 
intention of Her Majesty’s Government to defer putting into execution any Regula- 
tions which the Arbitrators may prescribe. Its object is to prevent the fur-seal “fish- 
ery in Behring’s Sea from being placed at the mercy of some third Power. There is 
nothing to prevent such third Power (Russia, for instance, as the most neighbouring 
nation), if unpledged, from stepping in and securing the fishery at the very seasons 
and in the very places which may be closed to the sealers of Great Britain and the 
United States by the Regulations. Great circumspection is called for in this diree- 
tion, as British and American sealers might recover their freedom, and evade all 
Regulations by simply hoisting the flag of a non-adhering Power. 
How is this difficulty to be met? Lord Salisbur y suggests that, if after the lapse 
of one year from the date of the decree of Regulations it sball appear to either Gov- 
ernment that serious injury is occasioned to the fishery from the causes above men- 
tioned, the Government complaining may give notice of the suspension of the 
Regulations during the ensuing year, and in such case the Regulations shall be 
suspended until arrangements are made to remedy the complaint. 
Lord Salisbury further proposes that, in case of any dispute arising between the 
two Governments as to the gravity of the i injury caused to the fishery, or as to any 
other fact, the question in controversy shall be referred for decision to a British and 
an American Admiral, who, if they should be unable to agree, may select an Umpire. 
Lord Salisbury desires me to ascertain whether some provision of the above 
nature would not meet the views of your Government. 
I have, &c. 
(Signed) JULIAN PAUNCEFOTE. 
No. 182. 
Sir J. Pauncefote to the Marquis of Salisbury.—( Received December 11.) 
[Telegraphic.] 
WASHINGTON, December 10, 1891. 
Immediately on receipt of your Lordship’s telegram of the 7th instant 
relative to Behring’s Sea I addressed a note to Mr. Blaine, as instructed, 
in the sense of the first part of the telegram above mentioned, conclud- 
ing with the words “at such a result.” 
I referred to a previous conversation which I had held with him on the 
same subject, and added that I did not understand him to deny my 
contention that if the arrangement arrived at between the two Govern- 
ments were, as your Lordship apprehended, violated by ships under 
foreign flags, to the serious injury of the seal-fishery, the Agreement 
must in that case collapse, as the two Governments could not be expected 
to enforce the Regulations on their nationals while such violations were 
taking place. For these reasons I expressed the hope that, on 
128 further consideration, the President would recognize the impor- 
tance of arriving atsome understanding of the nature suggested 
by your Lordship. 
I have to-day received a reply from Mr. Blaine to the following effect 
(see inclosure in Sir J. Pauncefote’s despatch of the 10th December). 
Shall I now reply to Mr. Blaine in the sense of the second part of 
your Lordship’s telegram above mentioned, and offer to sign the A gree- 
ment, subject to the1 reser vation and understanding set forth in the last 
para e raph? 
[ await your Lordship’s instructions. 
—- ee 
